4>^.  t^^ie>^ 


LIBRA^RY 

®!u0t0j)ical  Seminary, 


BV  811  .M545 

Miller,  Samuel,  1769-1850 

Infant  baptism  scriptural 

and  reasonable   ^ „ 


The  John  M.  Krebs  Donation. 


INFANT   BAPTISM 


SCRIPTURAL  AND  REASONABLE 


BAPTISM  BY  SPRINKLING 


AFFUSION 


THE  MOST  SUITABLE  AND  EDIFYING  MODE 


IN    FOUR   DISCOURSES. 


BY  SAMUEL  MILLER,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  and  Church  Government,  in  the  Theological 
Seminar}'  at  Princeton, 


PHILADELPHIA: 

PUBLISHED   BY   JOSEPH   WHETHAM. 

1835. 


Entered  according  to  the  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1834,  by  Wm. 
M.  Engles,  in  the  Office  of  the  Clerk,  of  the  District  Court,  of 
the  eastern  district  of  Pennsylvania. 


Printed  by 
William  S.  Martien, 
No.  9  George  street. 


CONTENTS, 


Page. 
Sermon  I. — Infant  Baptism  established,  -  13 

Sermon  II. — Objections  answered,      -         -  45 

Sermon  III. — The  mode  of  administering  Baptism,         80 

Sermon  IV. — The  same  subject  continued,  -         102 

ADDITIONAL  NOTES. 

Note  A. — Giving  a  name  in  Baptism,  -  -         -       125 

Note  B. — Baptismal  Regeneration,           -  -            126 

Note  C. — Sponsors  in  Baptism,  -         -  -        ,       136 

Note  D. — Confirmation,          -         -        -  -            140 

Note  E. — Vote  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  respect- 
ing Baptism, 147 


ADVERTISEMENT. 


The  substance  of  the  following  discourses 
was  delivered,  in  two  sermons,  in  the  Church 
in  Freehold,  Monmouth  county,  New^  Jersey, 
on  the  29th  of  September  1833.  A  desire  for 
their  publication  having  been  expressed  by  some 
who  heard  them,  I  have  thought  proper  to  re- 
vise and  enlarge  the  whole,  and  present  it  in 
the  present  form.  The  subject  is  one  which 
has  given  rise  to  much  warm  discussion,  and  it 
would  seem,  at  first  view,  to  be  a  work  of  su- 
pererogation, if  not  of  still  more  unfavourable 
character,  to  trouble  the  Christian  conmiunity 
with  another  treatise  upon  it.  But  our  Anti- 
poedobaptist  brethren  appear  to  be  resolved  that 
it  shall  never  cease  to  be  agitated ;  and  as,  in- 
deed, the  constant  stirring  of  this  controversy 
seems  to  furnish  no  small  share  of  the  very  ali- 
ment on  which  they  depend  for  subsistence  as 
a  denomination,  they  cannot  be  expected  to  let 
it  rest.  The  great  importance  of  the  subject, 
in  my  estimation ;  and  the  hope  that  this  little 
volume  may  reach  and  benefit  some,  who  are  in 
danger  of  being  drawn  into  the  toils  of  error, 
and  have  no  opportunity  of  perusing  larger 


6 

works,  have  induced  me  to  undergo  the  labour 
of  preparing  it  for  the  press. 

My  object  is,  not  to  write  for  the  learned,  but 
to  present  the  subject  in  that  brief,  plain,  popu- 
lar manner  which  is  adapted  to  the  case  of  those 
who  read  but  little.  I  have,  therefore,  design- 
edly avoided  the  introduction  of  much  matter 
which  properly  belongs  to  the  subject,  and 
which  is  to  be  found  in  larger  treatises;  and 
have  especially  refrained  from  entering  further 
into  the  field  of  philological  discussion,  than  was 
absolutely  necessary  for  the  accomplishment  of 
my  plan. 

If  I  know  my  own  heart,  my  purpose  is,  not 
to  wound  the  feelings  of  a  human  being ;  not  to 
stir  up  strife ;  but  to  provide  a  little  manual, 
better  adapted  than  any  of  this  class  that  I  have 
seen,  for  the  use  of  those  Presbyterians  who 
are  continually  assaulted,  and  sometimes  per- 
plexed, by  their  Baptist  neighbours.  May  the 
Divine  benediction  rest  upon  the  humble  oflfer- 

ing ! 

SAMUEL  MILLER. 

Princeton,  Nov.  1834. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM 


SERMON  I. 

And  when  she  was  baptized,  and  her  household,  she  besought  us, 
saying,  if  ye  have  judged  me  to  be  faithful  to  the  Lord,  come  into 
mine  house  and  abide  there.     Acts  xvi.  15. 

As  man  has  a  body  as  well  as  a  soul,  so  it  has  pleased 
infinite  wisdom  to  appoint  something  in  religion  adapted  to 
both  parts  of  our  nature.  Something  to  strike  the  senses, 
as  well  as  to  impress  the  conscience  and  the  heart;  or 
rather,  something  which  might,  through  the  medium  of  the 
senses,  reach  and  benefit  the  spiritual  part  of  our  constitu- 
tion. For,  as  our  bodies  in  this  world  of  sin  and  death, 
often  become  sources  of  moral  mischief  and  pain,  so,  by 
the  grace  of  God,  they  are  made  inlets  to  the  most  refined 
moral  pleasures,  and  means  of  advancement  in  the  divine 
life. 

But  while  the  outward  senses  are  to  be  consulted  in 
religion,  they  are  not  to  be  invested  with  unlimited  domi- 
nion. Accordingly  the  external  rites  and  ceremonies  of 
Christianity  are  few  and  simple,  but  exceedingly  appro- 
priate and  significant.  We  have  but  two  sacraments,  the 
one  emblematical  of  that  spiritual  cleansing,  and  the  other 
of  that  spiritual  nourishment,  which  we  need  both  for  en- 
joyment and  for  duty.  To  one  of  these  sacramental  ordi- 
nances there  is  a  pointed  reference  in  the  original  commis- 
sion given  by  their  Master  to  the  apostles  :  "  Go  ye  into  all 
the  world,  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature, — bap- 
tizing them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost;  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things 
whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you,  and  lo,  I  am  with  you 
always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world."  (Matt,  xxviii. 
19,  20.)  And,  accordingly,  wherever  the  Gospel  was  re- 
ceived, we  find  holy  baptism  reverently  administered  as  a 

B 


14  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

sign  and  seal  of  membership  in  the  family  of  Christ. 
Thus  on  the  occasion  to  which  our  text  refers,  "  a  certain 
woman,"  we  are  told,  "named  Lydia,  a  seller  of  purple,  of 
the  city  of  Thyatira,  heard  Paul  and  Silas  preach  in  the 
city  of  Philippi ;  and  the  Lord  opened  her  heart,  so  that 
she  attended  unto  the  things  which  were  spoken  of  Paul. 
And  when  she  was  baptized,  and  her  household,  she  be- 
sought us,  saying,  If  ye  have  judged  me  to  be  faithful  to 
the  Lord,  come  into  mine  house  and  abide  there." 

I  propose,  my  friends,  from  these  words,  to  address  you 
on  the  subject  of  Christian  Baptism.  You  are  sensible 
that  this  is  a  subject  on  which  much  controversy  has  ex- 
isted, in  modern  times,  among  professing  Christians.  It 
shall  be  my  endeavour,  by  the  grace  of  God,  with  all  can- 
dour and  impartiality,  to  inquire  what  the  Scriptures  teach 
concerning  this  ordinance,  and  what  appears  to  have  been 
the  practice  in  regard  to  it  in  the  purest  and  best  ages  of 
the  Christian  church,  as  well  as  in  later  times.  May  I  be 
enabled  to  speak,  and  you  to  ?iear  as  becomes  those  who 
expect,  in  a  little  while,  to  stand  before  the  judgment  seat 
of  Christ ! 

There  are  two  questions  concerning  baptism  to  which 
I  request  your  special  attention  at  this  time,  viz :  Who  are 
the  proper  subjects  of  this  ordinance  1  And  in  what  man- 
ner ought  it  to  be  administered  ?  To  the  first  of  these 
questions  our  attention  will  be  directed  in  the  present,  and 
the  ensuing  discourse. 

L  Who  are  to  be  considered  as  the  proper  subjects  of 
Christian  Baptism? 

That  baptism  ought  to  be  administered  to  all  adult  per- 
sons, who  profess  faith  in  Christ,  and  obedience  to  him, 
and  who  have  not  been  baptized  in  their  infancy,  is  not 
doubted  by  any.  In  this  all  who  consider  baptism  as  an 
ordinance  at  present  obligatory  are  agreed.  But  it  is  well 
known  that  there  is  a  large  and  respectable  body  of  pro- 
fessing Christians  among  us  who  believe,  and  confidently 
assert,  that  baptism  ought  to  be  confined  to  adults ;  who 
insist,  that  when  professing  Christians  bring  their  infant 
oflTspring,  and  dedicate  them  to  God,  and  receive  for  them 
the  washing  of  sacramental  water  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  en- 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  15 

tirely  pervert  and  misapply  an  important  Christian  ordi- 
nance. We  highly  respect  the  sincerity  and  piety  of 
many  who  entertain  these  opinions ;  but  we  are  perfectly 
persuaded  that  they  are  in  error,  nay  in  great  and  mis- 
chievous error ;  in  error  which  cannot  fail  of  exerting  a 
most  unhappy  influence  on  the  best  interests  of  the  church 
of  God.  We  have  no  doubt  that  the  visible  church  is  made 
up,  not  only  of  those  who  personally  profess  the  tnie  reli- 
gion, but  also  of  their  children ;  and  that  we  are  bound  not 
only  to  confess  Christ  before  men  for  ourselves,  but  also  to 
bring  our  infant  seed  in  the  arms  of  faith  and  love,  and  pre- 
sent them  before  the  Lord,  in  that  ordinance  which  is  at 
once  a  seal  of  God's  covenant  with  his  people,  and  an 
emblem  of  those  spiritual  blessings  which,  as  sinners,  we 
and  our  children  equally  and  indispensably  need. 

Our  reasons  for  entertaining  this  opinion,  with  entire 
confidence,  are  the  following : 

1.  Because  in  all  Jehovah's  coveyiants  with  his  profes- 
sing people,  from  the  earliest  ages,  and  in  all  states  of 
society,  their  infant  seed  have  been  included.  That  this 
was  the  case  with  regard  to  the  first  covenant  made  with 
Adam  in  paradise,  is  granted  by  all;  certainly  by  all  with 
whom  we  have  any  controversy  concerning  Infant  Bap- 
tism. And,  indeed,  the  consequences  of  the  violation  of 
that  covenant,  to  all  his  posterity,  furnish  a  standing  and 
a  mournful  testimony  that  it  embraced  them  all.  The 
covenant  made  with  Noah,  after  the  deluge,  was,  as  to  this 
point,  of  the  same  character.  Its  language  was,  "  Be- 
hold, I  establish  my  covenant  with  thee  and  with  thy 
seec?."  The  covenant  with  Abraham  was  equally  compre- 
hensive. "  Behold,"  says  Jehovah,  "  my  covenant  is 
with  thee.  Behold,  I  establish  my  covenant  with  thee, 
and  with  thy  seed,  after  thee."  The  covenants  of  Sinai 
and  of  Moab,  it  is  evident,  also  comprehended  the  child- 
ren of  the  immediate  actors  in  the  passing  scenes,  and 
attached  to  them,  as  well  as  to  their  fathers,  an  interest  in 
blessings  or  the  curses,  the  promises  or  the  threatenings 
which  those  covenants  respectively  included.  Accordingly 
when  Moses  was  about  to  take  leave  of  the  people,  he 
addressed  them  as  "  standing  before  the  Lord  their  God, 
with  their  little  ones,  and  their  wives,  to  enter  into  cove- 


16  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

nant  with  the  Lord  their  God."  (Deut.  xxix.  10 — 12.) 
And  when  we  come  to  the  New  Testament  economy,  still 
we  find  the  same  interesting  feature  not  only  retained,  but 
more  strikingly  and  strongly  displayed.  Still  the  promise, 
it  is  declared,  is  "  to  us  and  our  children,  even  as  many  as 
the  Lord  our  God  shall  call." 

Now,  has  this  been  a  feature  in  all  Jehovah's  covenants 
with  his  people  in  every  age  ?  And  shall  we  admit  the 
idea  of  its  failing  in  that  New  Testament  or  Christian 
covenant,  which,  though  the  same  in  substance  with  those 
which  preceded  it,  excels  them  all  in  the  extent  of  its 
privileges,  and  in  the  glory  of  its  promises  ?  It  cannot  be. 
The  thought  is  inadmissible.     But  further, 

2.  The  close  and  endearing  connection  between  parents 
and  children  affords  a  strong  argument  in  favour  of  the 
church-membership  of  the  infant  seed  of  believers.  The 
voice  of  nature  is  lifted  up,  and  pleads  most  powerfully  in 
behalf  of  our  cause.  The  thought  of  severing  parents 
from  their  offspring,  in  regard  to  the  most  interesting  rela- 
tions in  which  it  has  pleased  God  in  his  adorable  provi- 
dence to  place  them,  is  equally  repugnant  to  Christian 
feeling,  and  to  natural  law.  Can  it  be,  my  friends,  that 
when  the  stem  is  in  the  church,  the  branch  is  out  of  it? 
Can  it  be  that  when  the  parent  is  within  the  visible  king- 
dom of  the  Redeemer,  his  offspring,  bone  of  his  bone,  and 
flesh  of  his  flesh,  have  no  connection  with  it?  It  is  not  so 
in  any  other  society  that  the  great  moral  Governor  of  the 
world  ever  formed.  It  is  not  so  in  civil  society.  Children 
are  born  citizens  of  the  State  in  which  their  parents  re- 
sided at  the  time  of  their  birth.  In  virtue  of  their  birth 
they  are  plenary  citizens,  bound  by  all  the  duties,  and  en- 
titled to  all  the  privileges  of  that  relation,  whenever  they 
become  capable  of  exercising  them.  Prom  these  duties 
they  cannot  be  liberated.  Of  these  privileges  they  cannot 
be  deprived,  but  by  the  commission  of  crime.  But  why 
should  this  great  principle  be  set  aside  in  the  church  of 
God?  Surely  it  is  not  less  obvious  or  less  powerful  in 
grace  than  in  nature.  The  analogies  which  pervade  all  the 
works  and  dispensations  of  God  are  too  uniform  and 
striking  to  be  disregarded  in  an  inquiry  like  the  present. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  17 

But  we  hasten  to  facts  and  considerations  still  more  expli- 
citly laid  down  in  Holy  Scripture. 

3.  The  actual  and  acknowledged  church-membership  of 
infants  under  the  Old  Testament  economy,  is  a  decisive 
index  of  the  Divine  will  in  regard  to  this  matter. 

Whatever  else  may  be  doubtful,  it  is  certain  that  infants 
were,  in  fact,  members  of  the  church  under  the  former 
dispensation ;  and,  as  such,  were  the  regular  subjects  of  a 
covenant  seal.  When  God  called  Abraham,  and  estab- 
lished his  covenant  with  him,  he  not  only  embraced  his  in- 
fant seed,  in  the  most  express  terms,  in  that  covenant,  but 
he  also  appointed  an  ordinance  by  which  this  relation  of  his 
children  to  the  visible  church  was  publicly  ratiiied  and 
sealed,  and  that  when  they  were  only  eight  days  old.  If 
Jewish  adults  were  members  of  the  church  of  God,  under 
that  economy,  then,  assuredly,  their  infant  seed  were 
equally  members,  for  they  were  brought  into  the  same 
covenant  relation,  and  had  the  same  covenant  seal  im- 
pressed upon  their  flesh  as  their  adult  parents.  This 
covenant,  moreover,  had  a  respect  to  spiritual  as  well  as 
temporal  blessings.  Circumcision  is  expressly  declared, 
by  the  inspired  apostle,  to  have  been  "a  seal  of  the  righte- 
ousness of  faith."  (Rom.  iv.  11.)  So  far  was  it  from  being 
a  mere  pledge  of  the  possession  of  Canaan,  and  the  enjoy- 
ment of  temporal  prosperity  there,  that  it  ratified  and 
sealed  a  covenant  in  which  "  all  the  families  of  the  earth 
were  to  be  blessed."  And  yet  this  covenant  seal  was  so- 
lemnly appointed  by  God  to  be  administered,  and  was  ac- 
tually administered,  for  nearly  two  thousand  years,  to  in- 
fants of  the  tenderest  age,  in  token  of  their  relation  to 
God's  covenanted  family,  and  of  their  right  to  the  privi- 
leges of  that  covenant.  Here,  then,  is  a  fact, — a  fact  in- 
capable of  being  disguised  or  denied, — nay,  a  fact  acknow- 
ledged by  all — on  which  the  advocates  of  infant  baptism 
may  stand  as  upon  an  immoveable  rock.  For  if  infinite 
wisdom  once  saw  that  it  was  right  and  fit  that  infants 
should  be  made  the  subjects  of  "a  seal  of  the  righteousness 
of  faith,"  before  they  were  capable  of  exercising  faith, 
surely  a  transaction  the  same  in  substance  may  be  right 
and  fit  now.  Baptism,  which  is,  in  like  manner,  a  seal  of 
the  righteousness  of  faith,  may,  without  impropriety,  be 


18  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

applied  equally  early.  What  once,  undoubtedly,  existed 
in  the  church,  and  that  by  Divine  appointment,  may  exist 
still,  without  any  impeachment  of  either  the  wisdom  or 
benevolence  of  Him  who  appointed  it.     But, 

4.  As  the  infant  seed  of  the  people  of  God  are  acknow- 
ledged on  all  hands  to  have  been  members  of  the  church, 
equally  with  their  parents,  under  the  Old  Testament  dis- 
pensation, so  it  is  equally  certain  that  the  church  of  God 
is  the  same  in  substance  noiv  that  it  was  then;  and,  of 
course,  it  is  just  as  reasonable  and  proper,  on  principle, 
that  the  infant  offspring  of  professed  believers  should  be 
members  of  the  church  now,  as  it  was  that  they  should  be 
members  of  the  ancient  church.      I   am  aware  that  our 
Baptist  brethren  warmly  object  to  this  statement,  and  as- 
sert that   the  church   of   God  under  the  Old   Testament 
economy  and  the  New,  is  not  the  same,  but  so  essentially 
different,  that  the  same  principles  can  by  no  means  apply 
to  each.     They  contend  that  the  Old  Testament  dispensa- 
tion  was  a    kind   of   political   economy,    rather  national 
than  spiritual  in  its  character;  and,  of  course,  that  when 
the  Jews  ceased  to  be  a  people,  the  covenant  under  which 
they  had  been  placed,  was    altogether  laid  aside,  and  a 
covenant   of  an   entirely  new  character  introduced.     But 
nothing  can  be  more  evident  than  that  this  view  of  the 
subject  is  entirely  erroneous.     The  perpetuity  of  the  Abra- 
hamic  covenant,  and,  of  consequence,  the  identity  of  the 
church  under  both  dispensations,  is  so  plainly  taught  in 
Scripture,  and   follows   so   unavoidably  from  the   radical 
scriptural  principles  concerning  the  church  of  God,  that 
it  is  indeed  wonderful  how    any  believer  in  the  Bible  can 
call  in  question  the  fact.     Every  thing  essential  to  ecclesi- 
astical identity  is  evidently  found  here.     The  same  Divine 
Head ;  the  same  precious  covenant ;  the  same  great  spiri- 
tual design ;  the  same  atoning  blood ;  the  same  sanctifying 
Spirit,  in  which  we  rejoice,  as  the  life  and  the  glory  of  the 
New  Testament  church,  we  know,  from  the  testimony  of 
Scripture,  were  also  the  life  and  the  glory  of  the  church 
before  the  coming  of  the  Messiah.     It  is  not  more  certain 
that  a  man,  arrived  at  mature  age,  is  the  same  individual 
that  he  was  when  an  infant  on  his  mother's  lap,  than  it 
is  that  the  church,  in  the  plenitude  of  her  light  and  privi- 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  .  19 

leges,  after  the  coming  of  Christ,  is  the  same  church 
which,  many  centuries  before,  though  with  a  much  smaller 
amount  of  light  and  privilege,  yet,  as  we  are  expressly  told 
in  the  New  Testament,  (Acts  vii.  38.)  enjoyed  the  presence 
and  guidance  of  her  divine  Head  "in  the  wilderness." 
The  truth  is,  the  inspired  apostle,  in  writing  to  the  Gala- 
tians,  (iv.  1 — 6.)  formally  compares  the  covenanted  people 
of  God,  under  the  Old  Testament  economy,  to  an  heir 
under  age.  '*  Now  I  say,  that  the  heir,  as  long  as  he  is  a 
child,  differeth  nothing  from  a  servant,  though  he  be  lord 
of  all ;  but  is  under  tutors  and  governors,  until  the  time 
appointed  of  the  father.  Even  so  we,  when  we  were  chil- 
dren, were  in  bondage  under  the  elements  of  the  world. 
But  when  the  fulness  of  the  time  was  come,  God  sent  forth 
his  Son,  made  of  a  woman,  made  under  the  law,  to  redeem 
them  that  were  under  the  law,  that  we  might  receive  the 
adoption  of  sons." 

Hence,  the  inspired  apostle,  in  writing  to  the  Hebrews, 
(iv.  2.)  referring  to  the  children  of  Israel,  says — "  Unto 
us  was  the  Gospel  preached,  as  well  as  unto  them." 
Again,  in  writing  to  the  Corinthians,  (x.  1 — 4.)  he  de- 
clares, "  They  did  all  eat  the  same  spiritual  meat,  and  did 
all  drink  the  same  spiritual  drink ;  for  they  drank  of  that 
spiritual  rock  which  followed  them,  and  that  rock  was 
Christ."  "Abraham,"  we  are  told,  (John  viii.  56.)  "re- 
joiced to  see  Christ's  day;  he  saw  it,  and  was  glad." 
And,  of  the  patriarchs  generally,  we  are  assured  that 
they  saw  Gospel  promises  afar  off,  and  embraced  them. 
The  church  under  the  old  economy,  then,  was  not  only 
a  church — a  true  church — a  divinely  constituted  church — 
but  it  was  a  Gospel  church,  a  church  of  Christ — a  church 
built  upon  the  "  same  foundation  as  that  of  the  apos- 
tles." 

But  what  places  the  identity  of  the  church,  under  both 
dispensations,  in  the  clearest  and  strongest  light,  is  that 
memorable  and  decisive  passage,  in  the  11th  chapter  of 
the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  in  which  the  church  of  God  is 
held  forth  to  us  under  the  emblem  of  an  olive  tree. 
Under  the  same  figure  had  the  Lord  designated  the  church 
by  the  pen  of  Jeremiah  the  prophet,  in  the  11th  chapter 
of  his  prophecy.     The  prophet,  speaking  of  God's  cove- 


20  .  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

nanted  people  under  that  economy,  says — "  The  Lord 
called  thy  name  a  green  olive  tree,  fair  and  of  goodly 
fruit.''  Bat  concerning  this  olive  tree,  on  account  of  the 
sin  of  the  people  in  forsaking  the  Lord,  the  prophet  de- 
clares,— "  With  the  noise  of  a  great  tumult  he'hath  kindled 
a  fire  upon  it,  and  the  branches  of  it  are  broken."  Let 
me  request  you  to  compare  with  this,  the  language  of  the 
apostle  in  the  11th  chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Romans: 
"For  if  the  casting  away  of  them  be  the  reconciling  of 
the  world,  what  shall  the  receiving  of  them  be  but  life 
from  the  dead  ?  For  if  the  first  fruit  be  holy,  the  lump  is 
also  holy ;  and  if  the  root  be  holy,  so  are  the  branches. 
And  if  some  of  the  branches  be  broken  off,  and  thou,  being 
a  wild  olive  tree,  wert  grafted  in  among  them,  and  with 
them  partakest  of  the  root  and  fatness  of  the  olive  tree ; 
boast  not  against  the  branches;  but  if  thou  boast,  thou 
bearest  not  the  root,  but  the  root  thee.  Thou  wilt  say, 
then,  the  branches  were  broken  off,  that  I  might  be  grafted 
in.  Well,  because  of  unbelief  they  were  broken  off,  and 
thou  standest  by  faith.  Be  not  high-minded,  but  fear. 
For  if  God  spared  not  the  natural  branches,  take  heed  lest 
he  also  spare  not  thee.  Behold,  therefore,  the  goodness 
and  the  severity  of  God!  on  them  which  fell  severity; 
but  toward  thee  goodness,  if  thou  continue  in  his  good- 
ness. Otherwise,  thou  also  shalt  be  broken  off.  And 
they  also,  if  they  abide  not  still  in  unbelief,  shall  be  grafted 
in,  for  God  is  able  to  graft  them  in  again.  For  if  thou 
wert  cut  out  of  the  olive  tree,  which  is  wild  by  nature,  and 
wert  grafted,  contrary  to  nature,  into  a  good  olive  tree, 
how  much  more  shall  these,  which  be  the  natural  branches, 
be  grafted  into  their  own  olive  tree  ?" 

That  the  apostle  is  here  speaking  of  the  Old  Testament 
church,  under  the  figure  of  a  good  olive  tree,  cannot  be 
doubted,  and  is,  indeed,  acknowledged  by  all;  by  our 
Baptist  brethren  as  well  as  others.  Now  the  inspired 
apostle  says  concerning  this  olive  tree,  that  the  natural 
branches,  that  is  the  Jews,  were  broken  off  because  of 
unbelief.  But  what  was  the  consequence  of  this  excision  ? 
Was  the  tree  destroyed?  By  no  means.  The  apostle 
teaches  directly  the  contrary.  It  is  evident,  from  his  lan- 
guage, that  the  root  and  trunk,  in  all  their  "  fatness,"  re- 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  21 

mained;  and  Gentiles,  branches  of  an  olive  tree  "wild 
by  nature,"  were  "grafted  into  the  good  olive  tree;" — the 
same  tree  from  which  the  natural  branches  had  been  broken 
off.  Can  any  thing  be  more  pointedly  descriptive  of  iden- 
tiiy  than  this  ?  But  this  is  not  all.  The  apostle  apprizes 
us  that  the  Jews  are  to  be  brought  back  from  their  rebel- 
lion and  wanderings,  and  to  be  incorporated  with  the 
Christian  church.  And  how  is  this  restoration  described? 
It  is  called  "  grafting  them  in  again  into  their  own  olive 
treey  In  other  words,  the  "  tree"  into  which  the  Gentile 
Christians,  at  the  coming  of  Christ  were  "  grafted,"  was 
the  "  old  olive  tree,"  of  which  the  ancient  covenant  people 
of  God  were  the  "natural  branches;"  and,  of  course,  when 
the  Jews  shall  be  brought  in,  with  the  fulness  of  the  Gen- 
tiles, into  the  Christian  church,  the  apostle  expressly  tells 
us  they  shall  be  ^'•grafted  in  again  to  their  own  olive 
treeJ*^  Surely,  if  the  church  of  God  before  the  coming  of 
Christ,  and  the  church  of  God  after  the  advent,  were 
altogether  distinct  and  separate  bodies,  and  not  the  same  in 
their  essential  characters,  it  would  be  an  abuse  of  terms  to 
represent  the  Jews,  when  converted  to  Christianity,  as 
grafted  in  again  into  their  own  olive  tree. 

5.  Having  seen  that  the  infant  seed  of  the  professing 
people  of  God  were  members  of  the  church  under  the  Old 
Testament  economy ;  and  having  seen  also  that  the  church 
under  that  dispensation  and  the  present  is  the  same;  we 
are  evidently  prepared  to  take  another  step,  and  to  infer, 
that,  if  infants  were  once  m,embers,  and  if  the  church  re^ 
mains  the  same,  they  undoubtedly  are  still  members,  unless 
some  positive  divine  enactment  excluding  them,  can  be 
found.  As  it  was  a  positive  divine  enactment  which 
brought  them  in,  and  gave  them  a  place  in  the  church,  so 
it  is  evident  that  a  divine  enactment  as  direct  and  positive, 
repealing  their  old  privilege,  and  excluding  them  from  the 
covenanted  family,  must  be  found,  or  they  are  still  in  the 
church.  But  can  such  an  act  of  repeal  and  exclusion,  I 
ask,  be  produced  ?  It  cannot.  It  never  has  been,  audit 
never  can  be.  The  introduction  of  infants  into  the  church 
by  divine  appointment,  is  undoubted.  The  identity  of  the 
church,  under  both  dispensations,  is  undoubted.  The  per- 
petuity of  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  in  which  not  merely 


22  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISBf. 

the  lineal  descendants  of  Abraham,  but  "  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth  were  to  be  blessed,'^  is  undoubted.  And  we  find 
no  hint  in  the  New  Testament  of  the  high  privilege 
granted  to  the  infant  seed  of  believers  being  withdrawn. 
Only  concede  that  it  has  not  been  formally  withdrawn,  and 
it  remains  of  course.  The  advocates  of  infant  baptism  are 
not  bound  to  produce  from  the  New  Testament  an  express 
warrant  for  the  membership  of  the  children  of  believers. 
The  warrant  was  given,  most  expressly  and  formally,  two 
thousand  years  before  the  New  Testament  was  written; 
and,  having  never  been  revoked,  remains  firmly  and  indis- 
putably in  force. 

It  is  deeply  to  be  lamented  that  our  Baptist  brethren 
cannot  be  prevailed  upon  to  recognise  the  length  and 
breadth,  and  bearing  of  this  great  ecclesiastical  fact.  Here 
were  little  children,  eight  days  old,  acknowledged  as  mem- 
bers of  a  covenanted  society — a  society  consecrated  to  God, 
for  spiritual  as  well  as  temporal  benefits — and  stamped  with 
a  covenant  seal,  by  which  they  were  formally  bound,  as 
the  seed  of  believers,  to  be  entirely  and  forever  the  Lord's. 
Can  infant  membership  be  ridiculed,  as  it  often  is,  with- 
out lifting  the  puny  arm  against  Him  who  was  with  "  his 
church  in  the  wilderness,  and  whose  ways  are  all  wise  and 
righteous?" 

6.  Our  next  step  is  to  show  that  baptism  has  come  in 
the  room  of  circumcision,  and,  therefore,  that  the  former  is 
rightfully  and  properly  applied  to  the  same  subjects  as  the 
latter.  When  we  say  this,  we  mean,  not  merely  that  cir- 
cumcision is  laid  aside  in  the  church  of  Christ,  and  that 
baptism  has  been  brought  in,  but  that  baptism  occupies  the 
same  place,  as  the  appointed  initiatory  ordinance  in  the 
church,  and  that,  as  a  moral  emblem,  it  means  the  same 
thing.  The  meaning  and  design  of  circumcision  M'as 
chiefly  spiritual.  It  was  a  seal  of  a  covenant  which  had 
not  solely,  or  even  mainly,  a  respect  to  the  possession  of 
Canaan,  and  to  the  temporal  promises  which  were  con- 
nected with  a  residence  in  that  land ;  but  which  chiefly 
regarded  higher  and  more  important  blessings,  even  those 
which  are  conveyed  through  the  Messiah,  in  whom  "all 
the  families  of  the  earth"  are  to  be  blessed.  So  it  is  with 
baptism.     While  it  marks  an  external  relation,  and  seals 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM,  23 

outward  privileges,  it  is,  as  circumcision  was,  a  "  seal  of 
the  righteousness  of  faith,"  and  has  a  primary  reference  to 
the  benefits  of  the  Messiah's  mission  and  reign.  Circum- 
cision was  a  token  of  visible  membership  in  the  family  of 
God,  and  of  covenant  obligation  to  him.  So  is  baptism. 
Circumcision  was  the  ordinance  which  marked,  or  pub- 
licly ratified,  entrance  into  that  visible  family.  So  does 
baptism.  Circumcision  was  an  emblem  of  moral  cleansing 
and  purity.  So  is  baptism.  It  refers  to  the  remission  of 
sins  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  regeneration  by  his  Spirit ; 
and  teaches  us  that  we  are  by  nature  guilty  and  depraved, 
and  stand  in  need  of  the  pardoning  and  sanctifying  grace 
of  God  by  a  crucified  Redeemer.  Surely,  then,  there  is 
the  best  foundation  for  asserting,  that  baptism  has  come  in 
the  place  of  circumcision.  The  latter,  as  all  grant,  has 
been  discontinued;  and  now  baptism  occupies  the  same 
place,  means  the  same  thing,  seals  the  same  covenant,  and 
is  a  pledge  of  the  same  spiritual  blessings.  Who  can 
doubt,  then,  that  there  is  the  utmost  propriety,  upon  prin- 
ciple, in  applying  it  to  the  same  infant  subjects? 

Yet,  though  baptism  manifestly  comes  in  the  place  of 
circumcision,  there  are  points  in  regard  to  which  the 
former  differs  materially  from  the  latter.  And  it  differs 
precisely  as  to  those  points  in  regard  to  which  the  New 
Testament  economy  differs  from  the  Old,  in  being  more 
enlarged,  and  less  ceremonial.  Baptism  is  not  ceremo- 
nially restricted  to  the  eighth  day,  but  may  be  adminis- 
tered at  any  time  and  place.  It  is  not  confined  to  one  sex; 
but,  like  the  glorious  dispensation  of  which  it  is  a  seal,  it 
marks  an  enlarged  privilege,  and  is  administered  in  a  way 
which  reminds  us,  that  "  there  is  neither  Greek  nor  Jew, 
neither  bond  nor  free,  neither  male  nor  female,  in  the 
Christian  economy;  but  that  we  are  all  one  in  Christ 
Jesus." 

7.  Again;  it  is  a  strong  argument  in  favour  of  infant 
baptism,  that  we  find  the  principle  of  family  baptism 
again  and  again  adopted  in  the  apostolic  age.  We  are 
told,  by  men  learned  in  Jewish  antiquities,  that,  under  the 
Old  Testament  economy,  it  was  customary,  when  prose- 
lytes to  Judaism  were  gained  from  the  surrounding  nations, 
that  all  the  children  of  a  family  were  invariably  admitted  to 


24  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

membership  in  the  church  with  their  parents,  and  on  the 
faith  of  their  parents;  that  all  the  males,  children  and 
adults,  were  circumcised,  and  the  whole  family,  male  and 
female,  baptized,  and  incorporated  with  the  community  of 
'•God's  covenanted  people.*  Accordingly,  when  we  ex- 
amine the  New  Testament  history,  we  find  that,  under  the 
ministry  of  the  apostles,  who  were  all  native  Jews,  and 
had,  of  course,  been  long  accustomed  to  this  practice,  the 
same  principle  of  receiving  and  baptizing  families  on  the 
faith  of  the  parents,  was  most  evidently  adopted  and  acted 
upon  in  a  very  striking  manner.  When  "  the  heart  of 
Lydia  was  opened,  so  that  she  attended  to  the  things 
which  were  spoken  by  Paul,"  we  are  told  that  "  she  was 
baptized  and  her  household."  When  the  jailor  at  Philippi 
believed,  "  he  was  baptized,  he  and  all  his,  straightway." 
Thus  also  we  read  of  "  the  household  of  Stephanas"  being 
baptized.  Now,  though  we  are  not  certain  that  there  were 
young  children  in  any  of  these  families,  it  is  highly  pro- 
bable there  were.  At  any  rate,  the  great  principle  of 
family  baptism,  of  receiving  all  the  younger  members  of 
households  on  the  faith  of  their  domestic  head.,  seems  to 
be  plainly  and  decisively  established.  This  furnishes 
ground  on  which  the  advocate  of  infant  baptism  may  stand 
with  unwavering  confidence. 

And  here  let  me  ask,  was  it  ever  known  that  a  case  of 
family  baptism  occurred  under  the  direction  of  a  Baptist 
minister  ?  Was  it  ever  known  to  be  recorded,  or  to  have 
happened,  that  when,  under  the  influence  of  Baptist  minis- 

*  I  consider  the  Jewish  baptism  of  proselytes  as  a  historical  fact 
well  established.  I  am  aware  that  some  Pedobaptists,  whose  judg- 
ment and  learning  I  greatly  respect,  have  expressed  doubts  in  refer- 
§nce  to  this  matter.  But  when  I  find  tlie  Jews  asking  John  the  Bap- 
tist, "  Why  baptizest  thou,  then,  if  thou  be  not  the  Christ?"  &c.  I 
can  only  account  for  their  language  by  supposing  that  they  had 
been  accustomed  to  that  rite,  and  expected  the  Messiah,  when  he 
came,  to  practice  it.  We  have  the  best  evidence  that  they  baptized 
their  proselytes  as  early  as  the  second  century;  and  it  is  altogether 
incredible  that  they  should  copy  it  from  the  Christians.  And  a 
great  majority  of  the  most  competent  judges  in  this  case,  both  Jewish 
and  Christian,  from  Selden  and  Lightfoot  down  to  Dr.  Adam  Clarke, 
have  considered  the  testimony  to  the  fact  as  abundant  and  conclu- 
sive. 


SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM.  25 

trations,  the  parents  of  large  families  were  hopefully  con- 
verted, they  were  baptized,  they  and  all  their's  straight- 
way ?  There  is  no  risk  in  asserting  that  such  a  case  was 
never  heard  of.  And  why?  Evidently,  because  our  Bap- 
tist brethren  do  not  act  in  this  matter  upon  the  principles 
laid  down  in  the  New  Testament,  and  which  regulated 
the  primitive  Christians. 

8.  Another  consideration  possesses  much  weight  here. 
We  cannot  imagine  that  the  privileges  and  the  sign  of  in- 
fant membership,  to  which  all  the  first  Christians  had  been 
so  long  accustomed,  could  have  been  abruptly  withdrawn, 
without  vjounding  the  hearts  of  parents,  and  producing  in 
them,  feelings  of  deep  revolt  and  complaint  against  the 
new  economy.  Yet  we  find  no  hint  of  this  recorded  in 
the  history  of  the  apostolic  age.  Upon  our  principles, 
this  entire  silence  presents  no  difficulty.  The  old  prin- 
ciple and  practice  of  infant  membership,  so  long  conse- 
crated by  time,  and  so  dear  to  all  the  feelings  of  parental 
affection,  went  on  as  before.  The  identity  of  the  church 
under  the  new  dispensation  with  that  of  the  old,  being  well 
understood,  the  early  Christians  needed  no  new  warrant 
for  the  inclusion  of  their  infant  seed  in  the  covenanted 
family.  As  the  privilege  had  not  been  revoked,  it,  of 
course,  continued.  A  new  and  formal  enactment  in  favour 
of  the  privilege  would  have  been  altogether  superfluous, 
not  to  say  out  of  place ;  especially  as  it  was  well  under- 
stood, from  the  whole  aspect  of  the  new  economy,  that, 
instead  of  withdrawing  or  narrowing  privileges,  its  whole 
character  was  that  it  rather  multiplied  and  extended  them. 

But  our  Baptist  brethren  are  under  the  necessity  of  sup- 
posing, that  such  of  the  first  Christians  as  had  been  Jews, 
and  who  had  ever  been  in  the  habit  of  considering  their 
beloved  offspring  as  included,  with  themselves,  in  the 
privileges  and  promises  of  God's  covenant,  were  given  to 
understand,  when  the  New  Testament  church  was  set  up, 
that  these  covenant  privileges  and  promises  were  no  longer 
to  be  enjoyed  by  their  children;  that  they  were,  hence- 
forth, to  be  no  more  connected  with  the  church  than  the 
children  of  the  surrounding  heathen;  and  this  under  an 
economy  distinguished,  in  every  other  respect,  by  greater 
light,  and  more   enlarged  privilege: — I  say,  our   Baptist 

c 


26  SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM. 

brethren  are  under  the  necessity  of  supposing  that  the  Ursi 
Christians  were  met  on  the  organization  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament church,  with  an  announcement  of  this  kind,  and 
that  they  acquiesced  in  it  without  a  feeling  of  surprise,  or 
a  word  of  murmur!  Nay,  that  this  whole  retrograde 
change  passed  with  so  little  feeling  of  interest,  that  it  was 
never  so  much  as  mentioned  or  hinted  at  in  any  of  the 
epistles  to  the  churches.  But  can  this  supposition  be  for 
a  moment  admitted?  It  is  impossible.  We  may  con- 
clude, then,  that  the  acknowledged  silence  of  the  New 
Testament  as  to  any  retraction  of  the  old  privileges,  or  any 
complaint  of  its  recall,  is  so  far  from  warranting  a  conclu- 
sion unfavourable  to  the  church  membership  of  infants, 
that  it  furnishes  a  weighty  argument  of  an  import  directly 
the  reverse. 

9.  Although  the  New  Testament  does  not  contain  any 
specific  texts,  which,  in  so  many  words,  declare  that  the 
infant  seed  of  believers  are  members  of  the  church  in 
virtue  of  their  birth ;  yet  it  abounds  in  passages  which 
cannot  reasonably  be  explained  but  in  harmony  ivith  this 
doctrine.  The  following  are  a  specimen  of  the  passages 
to  w^hich  I  refer. 

The  prophet  Isaiah,  though  not  a  New  Testament 
writer,  speaks  much,  and  in  the  most  interesting  manner, 
of  the  New  Testament  times.  Speaking  of  the  "latter  day 
glory,"  of  that  day  when  "the  wolf  and  the  lajnb  shall 
feed  together,  and  the  lion  shall  eat  straw  like  the  bul- 
lock, and  when  there  shall  be  nothing  to  hurt  or  destroy 
in  all  God's  holy  mountain;"  speaking  of  that  day,  the  in- 
spired prophet  declares,  "  Behold,  I  create  new  heavens, 
and  a  new  earth,  and  the  former  shall  not  be  remembered, 
nor  come  into  mind.  For  as  the  days  of  a  tree  are  the 
days  of  mv  people,  and  mine  elect  shall  long  enjoy  the 
work  of  their  hands.  They  shall  not  labour  in  vain,  nor 
bring  forth  for  trouble ;  for  they  are  the  seed  of  the  blessed 
of  the  Lord,  and  their  offspring  with  them.'"  Isaiah  Ixv. 
17.  22,  23. 

The  language  of  our  Lord  concerning  little  children 
can  be  reconciled  with  no  other  doctrine  than  that  which 
I  am  now  endeavouring  to  establish.  "  Then  were  there 
brought  unto  him  little  children,  that  he  should  put  his 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  27 

haiids  on  them  and  pray;  and  his  disciples  rebuked  them. 
But  Jesus  said,  "Suffer  little  children  to  come  unto  me, 
and  forbid  them  not,  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
And  he  laid  his  hands  upon  them,  and  departed  thence," 
Matt.  xix.  13 — 15.  On  examining  tlie  language  used  by  the 
several  Evangelists  in  regard  to  this  occurrence,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  the  children  here  spoken  of  were  young  children, 
infants,  such  as  the  Saviour  could  "take  in  his  arms." 
The  language  which  our  Lord  himself  employs  concerning 
them  is  remarkable.  "  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 
That  is,  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven;  or,  to  them  be- 
longs the  kingdom  of  heaven.  It  is  precisely  the  same  form 
of  expression,  in  the  original,  which  our  Lord  uses  in  the 
commencement  of  his  sermon  on  the  mount,  when  he 
says,  "Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit,  for  theirs  is  the 
kingdom  of  heaven;"  "Blessed  are  they  that  are  perse- 
cuted for  righteousness  sake,  for  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of 
heaven."  This  form  of  expression,  of  course,  precludes 
the  construction  which  some  have  been  disposed  to  put  on 
the  passage,  in  order  to  evade  its  force,  viz.  that  it  implies, 
that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  made  up  of  such  as  resemble 
little  children  in  spirit.  We  might  just  as  well  say,  that 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  does  not  belong  to  those  who  are 
"poor  in  spirit,"  but  only  to  those  who  resemble  them; 
or,  that  it  does  not  belong  to  those  who  are  "persecuted 
for  righteousness  sake,"  but  only  to  those  who  manifest  a 
similar  temper.  Our  Lord's  language  undoubtedly  meant 
that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  was  really  theirs  of  whom  he 
spake ;  that  it  belonged  to  them ;  that  they  are  the  heirs  of 
it,  just  as  the  "poor  in  spirit,"  and  the  "persecuted  for 
righteousness  sake,"  are  themselves  connected  in  spirit 
and  in  promise  with  that  kingdom. 

But  what  are  we  to  understand  by  the  phrase  "  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,"  as  employed  in  this  place?  Most 
manifestly,  we  are  to  understand  by  it,  the  visible  Church, 
or  the  visible  kingdom  of  Christ,  as  distinguished  both  from 
the  world,  and  the  old  economy.  Let  any  one  impartially 
examine  the  Evangelists  throughout,  and  he  will  find  this 
to  be  the  general  import  of  the  phrase  in  question.  If  this 
be  the  meaning,  then  or  Saviour  asserts,  in  the  most  direct 
and  pointed  terms,  the  reality  and  the  Divine  warrant  of  in- 


26  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

fant  church  membership.  But  even  if  the  kingdom  of 
glory  be  intended,  still  our  argument  is  not  weakened,  but 
rather  fortified.  For  if  the  kingdom  of  glory  belong  to  the 
infant  seed  of  believers,  much  more  have  they  a  title  to 
the  privileges  of  the  church  on  earth. 

Another  passage  of  Scripture  strongly  speaks  the  same 
language.  I  refer  to  the  declaration  which  we  find  in  the 
sermon  of  the  apostle  Peter,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost. 
When  a  large  number  of  the  hearers,  on  that  solemn  day, 
were  "  pricked  in  their  hearts,  and  said  unto  Peter,  and  to 
the  rest  of  the  apostles,  men  and  brethren,  what  shall  we 
do?"  The  reply  of  the  inspired  minister  of  Christ  was, 
^'  Repent,  and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name 
of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall  re- 
ceive the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  For  the  promise  is  unto 
you,  and  to  your  children,  and  to  all  that  are  afar  off, 
even  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call."  The  apostle 
is  here  evidently  speaking  of  the  promise  of  God  to  his 
covenant  people ;  that  promise  in  which  he  engages  to  be 
their  God,  and  to  constitute  them  his  covenanted  family. 
Now  this  promise,  he  declared  to  those  whom  he  ad- 
dressed, extended  to  their  children  as  well  as  to  themselves, 
and,  of  course,  gave  those  children  a  covenant  right  to  the 
privileges  of  the  family.  But  if  they  have  a  covenant 
title  to  a  place  in  this  family,  we  need  no  formal  argument 
to  show  that  they  are  entitled  to  the  outward  token  and 
seal  of  that  family. 

I  shall  adduce  only  one  more  passage  of  Scripture,  at 
present,  in  support  of  the  doctrine  for  which  I  contend. 
I  refer  to  that  remarkable,  and,  as  it  appears  to  me,  con- 
clusive declaration  of  the  apostle  Paul,  concerning  children, 
which  is  found  in  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  first  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians,  in  reply  to  a  query  addressed  to  him 
by  the  members  of  that  church,  respecting  the  Christian 
law  of  marriage:  "The  unbelieving  husband  is  sanctified 
by  the  wife ;  and  the  unbelieving  wife  is  sanctified  by  the 
husband;  else  were  your  children  unclean,  but  now  are 
they  holy."  The  great  question  in  relation  to  this  passage 
is,  in  what  sense  does  a  believing  parent  "  sanctify"  an 
unbelieving  one,  so  that  their  children  are  "holy  ?"  It  cer- 
tainly cannot  mean,  that  every  pious  husband  or  wife  that 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  29 

is  allied  to  an  unbelieving  partner,  is  always  instrumental 
in  conferring  on  that  partner  true  spiritual  purity,  or,  in 
other  words,  regeneration  and  sanctification  of  heart;  nor 
that  every  child  born  of  parents  of  whom  one  is  a  be- 
liever, is,  of  course,  the  subject  of  Gospel  holiness,  or  of 
internal  sanctification.  No  one  who  intelligently  reads 
the  Bible,  or  who  has  eyes  to  see  what  daily  passes  around 
him,  can  possibly  put  such  a  construction  on  the  passage. 
Neither  can  it  be  understood  to  mean,  as  some  have 
strangely  imagined,  that  where  one  of  the  parents  is  a 
believer,  the  children  are  legitimate ;  that  is,  the  offspring 
of  parents,  one  of  whom  is  pious,  are  no  longer  bastards, 
but  are  to  be  considered  as  begotten  in  lawful  wedlock  ! 
The  word  "  holy"  is  no  where  applied  in  Scripture  to 
legitimacy  of  birth.  The  advocates  of  this  construction 
may  be  challenged  to  produce  a  single  example  of  such  an 
application  of  the  term.  And  as  to  the  suggestion  of  piety 
in  one  party  being  necessary  to  render  a  marriage  covenant 
valid,  nothing  can  be  more  absurd.  Were  the  marriages 
of  the  heathen  in  the  days  of  Paul  all  illicit  connections  ? 
Are  the  matrimonial  contracts  which  take  place  every 
day,  among  us,  where  neither  of  the  parties  is  pious,  all 
illegitimate  and  invalid  ?  Surely  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive 
of  a  subterfuge  more  completely  preposterous,  or  more 
adapted  to  discredit  a  cause  which  finds  it  necessary  to  re- 
sort to  such  aid. 

The  terms  "holy"  and  "unclean,"  as  is  well  known  to 
all  attentive  readers  of  Scripture,  have  not  only  a  spiritual, 
but  also  an  ecclesiastical  sense,  in  the  word  of  God. 
While,  in  some  cases,  they  express  that  which  is  inter- 
nally and  spiritually  conformed  to  the  Divine  image ;  in 
others,  they  quite  as  plainly  designate  something  set  apart 
to  a  holy  or  sacred  use ;  that  is,  separated  from  a  common 
or  profane,  to  a  holy  purpose.  Thus,  under  the  Old  Tes- 
tament economy,  the  peculiar  people  of  God,  are  said  to 
be  a  "holy  people,"  and  to  be  "severed  from  all  other  peo- 
ple, that  they  might  be  the  Lord's;"  not  because  they  were 
all,  or  even  a  majority  of  them,  really  consecrated  in  heart 
10  God ;  but  because  they  were  all  his  professing  people, — 
his  covenanted  people ;  they  all  belonged  to  that  external 
body  which  he  had  called  out  of  the  world,  and  established 


30  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

as  the  depository  of  his  truth,  and  the  conservator  of  his 
glory.  In  these  two  senses,  the  terms  "holy"  and  "un- 
clean" are  used  in  both  Testament's  times,  almost  innu- 
merable. And  what  their  meaning  is,  in  any  particular 
case,  must  be  gathered  from  the  scope  of  the  passage.  In 
the  case  before  us,  the  latter  of  these  two  senses  is  evi- 
dently required  by  the  whole  spirit  of  the  apostle's  rea- 
soning. 

It  appears  that  among  the  Corinthians,  to  whom  the 
apostle  wrote,  there  were  many  cases  of  professing  Chris- 
tians being  united  by  the  marriage  tie  with  pagans ;  the 
former,  perhaps,  being  converted  after  marriage ;  or  being 
so  unwise,  as,  after  conversion,  deliberately  to  form  this 
unequal  and  unhappy  connection.  What  was  to  be 
deemed  of  such  marriages,  seems  to  have  been  the  grave 
question  submitted  to  this  inspired  teacher.  He  pro- 
nounces, under  the  direction  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  that,  in 
all  such  cases,  when  the  unbeliever  is  willing  to  live  with 
the  believer,  they  ought  to  continue  to  live  together ;  that 
their  connection  is  so  sanctified  by  the  character  of  the  be- 
lieving companion,  that  their  children  are  "holy,"  that  is, 
in  covenant  with  God ;  members  of  that  church  with  which 
the  believing  parent  is,  in  virtue  of  his  profession,  united: 
in  one  word,  that  the  infidel  party  is  so  far,  and  in  such  a 
sense,  consecrated  by  the  believing  party,  that  their  chil- 
dren shall  be  reckoned  to  belong  to  the  sacred  family  with 
which  the  latter  is  connected,  and  shall  be  regarded  and 
treated  as  members  of  the  Church  of  God.* 

"The  passage  thus  explained,"  says  an  able  writer, 
"establishes  the  church  membership  of  infants  in  another 
form.  For  it  assumes  the  principle,  that  when  both  pa- 
rents are  reputed  believers,  their  children  belong  to  the 
Church  of  God  as  a  matter  of  course.  The  whole  diffi- 
culty proposed  by  the  Corinthians  to  Paul,  grows  out  of 
this  principle.  Had  he  taught,  or  they  understood,  that 
no  children,  be  their  parents  believers  or  unbelievers,  are 

*  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  this  interpretation  of  the  passage  is 
adopted,  and  decisively  maintained  by  Augustine,  one  of  the  most 
pious  and  learned  divines  of  the  fourth  century.  Z?e  Sermone  Domini 
in  Monte,  ch.  27 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTIS3I.  31 

to  be  accounted  members  of  the  church,  the  difficulty- 
could  not  have  existed.  For  if  the  faith  of  both  parents 
could  not  confer  upon  the  child  the  privilege  of  member- 
ship, the  faith  of  only  one  of  them  certainly  could  not. 
The  point  was  decided.  It  would  have  been  mere  imper- 
tinence to  teaze  the  apostle  with  queries  which  carried 
their  own  answers  along  with  them.  But  on  the  supposi- 
tion that  when  both  parents  were  members,  their  children 
were  also  members;  the  difficulty  is  very  natural  and  seri- 
ous. "I  see,"  would  a  Corinthian  convert  exclaim,  "I 
see  the  children  of  my  Christian  neighbours,  owned  as 
members  of  the  Church  of  God ;  and  I  see  the  children  of 
others,  who  are  unbelievers,  rejected  with  themselves.  I 
believe  in  Christ  myself:  but  my  husband,  my  wife,  be- 
lieves not.  What  is  to  become  of  my  children?  Are  they 
to  be  admitted  with  myself?  Or  are  they  they  to  be  cast 
off  with  my  partner?" 

"Let  not  your  heart  be  troubled,"  replies  the  apostle, 
*'God  reckons  them  to  the  believing,  not  to  the  unbelieving 
parent.  It  is  enough  that  they  are  yours.  The  infidelity 
of  your  partner  shall  never  frustrate  their  interest  in  the 
covenant  of  your  God.  They  are  holy  because  you  are  so." 

"  This  decision  put  the  subject  at  rest.  And  it  lets  us 
know  that  one  of  the  reasons,  if  not  the  chief  reason  of 
the  doubt,  whether  a  married  person  should  continue, 
after  conversion,  in  the  conjugal  society  of  an  infidel  part- 
ner, arose  from  a  fear  lest  such  continuance  should  ex- 
clude the  children  from  the  Church  of  God.  Otherwise,  it 
is  hard  to  comprehend  why  the  aposde  should  dissuade 
them  from  separating  by  such  an  argument  as  he  has  em- 
ployed in  the  text.  And  it  is  utterly  inconceivable  how 
such  a  doubt  could  have  entered  their  minds,  had  not  the 
membership  of  infants,  born  of  believing  parents,  been  un- 
disputed, and  esteemed  a  high  privilege  \  so  high  a  privi- 
lege, that  the  apprehension  of  losing  it,  made  conscientious 
parents  at  a  stand,  whether  they  ought  not  rather  to  break 
the  ties  of  wedlock,  by  withdrawing  from  an  unbelieving 
husband  or  wife.  Thus  the  origin  of  this  difficulty,  on  the 
one  hand,  and  the  solution  of  it,  on  the  other,  concur  in 
establishing  our  doctrine,  that,  by  the  appointment  of  God 


32  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

himself,  the  infants  of  believing  parents  are  born  members 
of  his  church."* 

10.  Finally;  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church,  from 
the  apostolic  age,  furnishes  an  argument  of  irresistible  force 
in  favour  of  the  divine  authority  of  infant  baptism. 

I  can  assure  you,  my  friends,  with  the  utmost  candour 
and  confidence,  after  much  careful  inquiry  on  the  subject, 
that,  for  more  than  fifteen  hundred  years  after  the  birth  of 
Christ,  there  was  not  a  single  society  of  professing  Chris- 
tians on  earth,  who  opposed  infant  baptism  on  any  thing 
like  the  grounds  which  distinguish  our  modern  Baptist 
brethren.  It  is  an  undoubted  fact,  that  the  people 
known  in  ecclesiastical  history  under  the  name  of  the 
Anabaptists,  who  arose  in  Germany,  in  the  year  1522, 
were  the  very  first  body  of  people,  in  the  whole  Chris- 
tian world,  who  rejected  the  baptism  of  infants,  on  the 
principles  now  adopted  by  the  Antipoedobaptist  body. 
This,  I  am  aware,  will  be  regarded  as  an  untenable  posi- 
tion by  some  of  the  ardent  friends  of  the  Baptist  cause ; 
but  nothing  can  be  more  certain  than  that  it  is  even  so. 
Of  this  a  short  induction  of  particulars  will  afford  conclu- 
sive evidence. 

TertuUian,  about  two  hundred  years  after  the  birth  of 
Christ,  is  the  first  man  of  whom  we  read  in  ecclesiastical 
history,  as  speaking  a  word  against  infant  baptism;  and 
he,  while  he  recognizes  the  existence  and  prevalence 
of  the  practice,  and  expressly  recommends  that  in- 
fants be  baptized,  if  they  are  not  likely  to  survive  the 
period  of  infancy;  yet  advises  that,  where  there  is  a  pros- 
pect of  their  living,  baptism  be  delayed  until  a  late  period 
in  life.  But  what  was  the  reason  of  this  advice?  The 
moment  we  look  at  the  reason,  we  see  that  it  avails  nothing 
to  the  cause  in  support  of  which  it  is  sometimes  produced. 
TertuUian  adopted  the  superstitious  idea,  that  baptism  was 
accompanied  with  the  remission  of  all  past  sins ;  and  that 
sins  committed  after  baptism  were  peculiarly  danger- 
ous. He,  therefore,  advised,  that  not  merely  infants,  but 
young  men  and  young  women ;  and  even  young  widows 

*  Essays  on  the  Church  of  God,  by  Dr.  J.  M.  Mason.  Christian's 
Magazine^  ii.  49,  50. 


SERMONS  ON  BA.PTISM.  ,  83 

and  widowers  should  postpone  their  baptism  until  the 
period  of  youthful  appetite  and  passion  should  have 
passed.  In  short,  he  advised  that,  in  all  cases  in  which 
death  was  not  likely  to  intervene,  baptism  be  postponed, 
until  the  subjects  of  it  should  have  arrived  at  a  period  of 
life,  when  they  would  be  no  longer  in  danger  of  being  led 
astray  by  youthful  lusts.  And  thus,  for  more  than  a  cen- 
tury after  the  age  of  Tertullian,  we  find  some  of  the  most 
conspicuous  converts  to  the  Christian  faith,  postponing 
baptism  till  the  close  of  life.  Constantine  the  Great,  we 
are  told,  though  a  professing  Christian  for  many  years 
before,  was  not  baptized  till  after  the  commencement  of 
his  last  illness.  The  same  fact  is  recorded  of  a  number  of 
other  distinguished  converts  to  Christianity,  about  and  after 
that  time.  But,  surely,  advice  and  facts  of  this  kind  make 
nothing  in  favour  of  the  system  of  our  Baptist  brethren. 
Indeed,  taken  altogether,  their  historical  bearing  is  strongly 
in  favour  of  our  system. 

The  next  persons  that  we  hear  of  as  calling  in  question 
the  propriety  of  infant  baptism,  were  the  small  body  of 
people  in  France,  about  twelve  hundred  years  after  Christ, 
who  followed  a  certain  Peter  de  Briiis,  and  formed  an 
inconsiderable  section  of  the  people  known  in  ecclesiastical 
history  under  the  general  name  of  the  Wcddenses.  This  body 
maintained  that  infants  ought  not  to  be  baptized,  because 
they  were  incapable  of  salvation.  They  taught  that  none 
could  be  saved  but  those  who  wrought  out  their  salvation 
by  a  long  course  of  self-denial  and  labour.  And  as  infants 
were  incapable  of  thus  "working  out  their  own  salvation,*' 
they  held  that  making  them  the  subjects  of  a  sacramental 
seal,  was  an  absurdity.  But  surely  our  Baptist  brethren 
cannot  be  willing  to  consider  these  people  as  their  prede- 
cessors, or  to  adopt  their  creed. 

We  hear  no  more  of  any  society  or  organized  body  of 
Antipoedohaptists,  until  the  sixteenth  century,  M^hen  they 
arose,  as  before  stated,  in  Germany,  and  for  the  first  time 
broached  the  doctrine  of  our  modern  Baptist  brethren.  As 
far  as  I  have  been  able  to  discover,  they  were  absolutely 
unknown  in  the  whole  Christian  world,  before  that  time. 

But  we  have  something  more  than  mere  negative  testi- 
mony on  this  subject.     It  is  not  only  certain,  that  we  hear 


34  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

of  no  society  of  Antipoedobaptists  resembling  our  present 
Baptist  brethren,  for  more  than  fifteen  hundred  years  after 
Christ ;  but  we  have  positive  and  direct  proof  that,  during 
the  whole  of  that  time,  infant  baptism  was  the  general 
and  unopposed  practice  of  the  Christian  Church. 

To  say  nothing  of  earlier  intimations,  wholly  irrecon- 
cileable  with  any  other  practice  than  that  of  infant  baptism, 
Origen,  a  Greek  father  of  the  third  century,  and  decidedly 
the  most  learned  man  in  his  day,  speaks  in  the  most  un- 
equivocal terms  of  the  baptism  of  infants,  as  the  general 
practice  of  the  church  in  his  time,  and  as  having  been  re- 
ceived from  the  Apostles.  His  testimony  is  as  follows — 
"According  to  the  usage  of  the  church,  baptism  is  given 
even  to  infants;  when  if  there  were  nothing  in  infants 
which  needed  forgiveness  and  mercy,  the  grace  of  baptism 
would  seem  to  be  superfluous."*  Again;  "  Infants  are 
baptized  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  Of  what  sins  ?  Or, 
when  have  they  sinned?  Or,  can  there  be  any  reason  for 
the  laver  in  their  case,  unless  it  be  according  to  the  sense 
which  we  have  mentioned  above,  viz  :  that  no  one  is  free 
from  pollution,  though  he  has  lived  but  one  day  upon  earth? 
And  because  by  baptism  native  pollution  is  taken  away, 
therefore  infants  are  baptized."!  Again:  "  For  this  cause 
it  was  that  the  church  received  an  order  from  the  Apostles 
to  give  baptism  even  to  infants. "J 

The  testimony  of  Cyprian,  a  Latin  Father  of  the  third 
century,  contemporary  with  Origen,  is  no  less  decisive. 
It  is  as  follows  : 

In  the  year  253  after  Christ,  there  was  a  Council  of 
sixty-six  bishops  or  pastors  held  at  Carthage,  in  which 
Cyprian  presided.  To  this  Council,  Fidus,  a  country 
pastor,  presented  the  following  question,  which  he  wished 
them,  by  their  united  wisdom,  to  solve — viz.  Whether  it 
was  necessary,  in  the  administration  of  baptism,  as  of  cir- 
cumcision, to  wait  until  the  eighth  day;  or  whether  a  child 
might  be  baptized  at  an  earlier  period  after  its  birth?  The 
question,  it  will  be    observed,  was   not   whether   infants 

*  Homil.  VIII.  in  Levit.  ch.  12. 

t  Homil.  in  Luc.  14. 

X  Comment,  in  Epist.  ad  Romanos.  Lib.  5. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM*  35 

ought  to  be  baptized  ?  TTidt  was  taken  for  granted.  Butj 
simply,  whether  it  was  necessary  to  wait  until  the  eighth 
day  after  their  birth?  The  Council  came  unanimously 
to  the  following  decision,  and  transmitted  it  in  a  letter  to 
the  inquirer. 

^'Cyprian  and  the  rest  of  the  Bishops  who  were  present 
in  the  Council,  sixty-six  in  number,  to  Fidus,  our  brother, 
greeting : 

"  As  to  the  case  of  Infants, — whereas  you  judge  that 
they  must  not  be  baptized  within  two  or  three  days  after 
they  are  born,  and  that  the  rule  of  circumcision  is  to  be 
observed,  that  no  one  should  be  baptized  and  sanctified 
before  the  eighth  day  after  he  is  born;  we  were  all  in  the 
Council  of  a  very  different  opinion.  As  for  M^hat  you 
thought  proper  to  be  done,  no  one  was  of  your  mind; — but 
we  all  rather  judged  that  the  mercy  and  gi-ace  of  God  is  to 
be  denied  to  no  human  being  that  is  born.  This,  there- 
fore, dear  brother,  was  our  opinion  in  the  Council;  that 
we  ought  not  to  hinder  any  person  from  baptism,  and  the 
grace  of  God,  who  is  merciful  and  kind  to  us  all.  And 
this  rule,  as  it  holds  for  all,  we  think  more  especially  to  be 
observed  in  reference  to  infants,  even  to  those  newly 
born."* 

Surely  no  testimony  can  be  more  unexceptionable  and 
decisive  than  this.  Lord  Chancellor  King,  in  his  account 
of  the  primitive  church,  after  quoting  what  is  given  above, 
and  much  more,  subjoins  the  following  remark — "Here, 
then,  is  a  synodical  decree  for  the  baptism  of  infants,  as 
formal  as  can  possibly  be  expected  ;  which  being  the  judg- 
ment of  a  synod,  is  more  authentic  and  cogent  than  that 
of  a  private  father;  it  being  supposeable  that  a  private 
father  might  write  his  own  particular  judgment  and  opinion 
only  ;  but  the  determination  of  a  synod  (and  he  might  have 
added,  the  unanimous  determination  of  a  synod  of  sixty-six 
members)  denotes  the  common  practice  and  usage  of  the 
whole  church. "t 

The  Famous  Chrysostom,  a  Greek  father,  who  flourished 
towards  the  close  of  the  fourth  century,  having  had  occasion 

*  Cyprian.  Epist.  66. 

t  Inquiry  into  the  Constitution,  «fec.  Part  II.  Chap.  3. 


36  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

to  speak  of  circumcision,  and  of  the  inconvenience  and  pain 
which  attended  its  dispensation,  proceeds  to  say — "But  our 
circumcision,  I  mean  the  grace  of  baptism,  gives  cure  with- 
out pain,  and  procures  to  us  a  thousand  benefits,  and  fills  us 
with  the  gi'ace  of  the  Spirit ;  and  it  has  no  determinate  time, 
as  that  had ;  but  one  that  is  in  the  veiy  beginning  of  his  age, 
or  one  that  is  in  the  middle  of  it,  or  one  that  is  in  his  old  age, 
may  receive  this  circumcision  made  without  hands;  in  which 
there  is  no  trouble  to  be  undergone  but  to  throw  off  the  load 
of  sins,  and  to  receive  pardon  for  all  past  offences."* 

Passing  by  the  testimony  of  several  other  conspicuous 
writers  of  the  third  and  fourth  centuries,  in  support  of  the 
fact,  that  infant  baptism  was  generally  practised  when  they 
wrote,  I  shall  detain  you  with  only  one  testimony  more  in 
relation  to  the  history  of  this  ordinance.  It  is  that  of  ^li- 
gustine,  one  of  the  most  pious,  learned  and  venerable 
fathers  of  the  Christian  Church,  who  lived  a  little  more 
than  three  hundred  years  after  the  Apostles, — taken  in 
connection  with  that  of  Pelagius,  the  learned  heretic, 
who  lived  at  the  same  time.  Augustine  had  been  pleading 
against  Pelagius,  in  favor  of  the  doctrine  of  original  sin. 
In  the  course  of  this  plea,  he  asks — "Why  are  infants  bap- 
tized for  the  remission  of  sins,  if  they  have  no  sin  ?"  At 
the  same  time  intimating  to  Pelagius,  that  if  he  would  be 
consistent  with  himself,  his  denial  of  original  sin  must 
draw  after  it  the  denial  of  infant  baptism.  The  reply  of 
Pelagius  is  striking  and  unequivocal.  "Baptism,"  says 
he,  "ought  to  be  administered  to  infants,  with  the  same 
sacramental  words  which  are  used  in  the  case  of  adult  per- 
sons."  "Men  slander  me  as  if  I  denied  the  sacrament 

of  baptism  to  infants." ''^1  never  heard  of  any,  not  even 

the  most  impious  heretic,  who  denied  baptism  to  infants; 
for  who  can  be  so  impious  as  to  hinder  infants  from  being 
baptised,  and  born  again  in  Christ,  and  so  make  them  miss 
of  the  kingdom  of  God?"  Again:  Augustine  remarks,  in 
reference  to  the  Pelagians — "Since  they  grant  that  infants 
must  be  baptized,  as  not  being  able  to  resist  the  authority 
of  the  whole  church,  which  ivas  doubtless  delivered  by 
our  Lord  and  his  Apostles;  they  must  consequently  grant 

*  Homil.  40.  in  Genesin, 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  37 

that  they  stand  in  need  of  the  benefit  of  the  Mediator ;  that 
being  offered  by  the  sacrament,  and  by  the  charity  of  the 
faithful,  and  so  being  incorporated  into  Christ's  body,  they 
may  be  reconciled  to  God,"  &:c.  Again,  speaking  of  cer- 
tain heretics  at  Carthage,  who,  though  they  acknowledged 
infant  baptism,  took  wrong  views  of  its  meaning,  Augustine 
remarks — "They,  minding  the  Scriptures,  and  the  autho- 
rity of  the  tohole  church,  and  the  form  of  the  sacrament  it- 
self, see  well  that  baptism  in  infants  is  for  the  remission  of 
sins."  Further,  in  his  work  against  the  Donatists,  the 
same  writer  speaking  of  baptized  infants  obtaining  salva- 
tion without  the  personal  exercise  of  faith,  he  says — 
**  which  the  tvhole  body  of  the  church  holds,  as  delivered 
to  them  in  the  case  of  little  infants  baptized ;  who  certainly 
cannot  believe  with  the  heart  unto  righteousness,  or  con- 
fess with  the  mouth  unto  salvation,  nay,  by  their  crying 
and  noise  while  the  sacrament  is  administering,  they  dis- 
turb the  holy  mysteries :  and  yet  7io  Christian  man  will 
say  that  they  are  baptized  to  no  purpose."  Again,  he 
says — "The  custom  of  our  mother  the  church  in  baptizing 
infants  must  not  be  disregarded,  nor  be  accounted  needless, 
nor  believed  to  be  any  thing  else  than  an  ordinance  deliv- 
ered to  us  from  the  Apostles.'^''  In  short,  those  who  will 
be  at  the  trouble  to  consult  the  large  extracts  from  the 
writings  of  Augustine,  among  other  Christian  fathers,  in 
the  learned  WalVs  history  of  Infant  Baptism,  will  find  that 
venerable  father  declaring  again  and  again  that  he  never 
met  with  any  Christian,  cither  of  the  general  church,  or 
of  any  of  the  sects,  nor  with  any  writer,  who  owned  the 
authority  of  Scripture,  who  taught  any  other  doctrine  than 
that  infants  were  to  be  baptized  for  the  remission  of 
sin.  Here,  then,  were  two  men,  undoubtedly  among  the 
most  learned  then  in  the  world — Augustine  and  Pela- 
gius;  the  former  as  familiar  probably  with  the  writings 
of  all  the  distinguished  fathers  who  had  gone  before 
him,  as  any  man  of  his  time ;  the  latter  also  a  man  of 
great  learning  and  talents,  who  had  travelled  over  the 
greater  part  of  the  Christian  world;  who  both  declare, 
about  three  hundred  years  after  the  apostolic  age,  that  they 
never  saw  or  heard  of  any  one  who  called  himself  a 
Christian,  not  even  the  most  impious  heretic,  no  nor  any 

D 


38  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

writer  who  claimed  to  believe  in  the  Scriptures,  who  de- 
nied the  baptism  of  infants.*  Can  the  most  incredulous 
reader,  who  is  not  fast  bound  in  the  fetters  of  invincible 
prejudice,  hesitate  to  admit,  first,  that  these  men  verily  be- 
lieved that  infant  baptism  had  been  the  universal  practice  of 
the  church  from  the  days  of  the  apostles ;  and,  secondly, 
that,  situated  and  informed  as  they  were,  it  was  impossible 
that  they  should  be  mistaken  ? 

The  same  Augustine,  in  his  Epistle  to  Boniface,  while 
he  expresses  an  opinion  that  the  parents  are  the  proper 
persons  to  offer  up  their  children  to  God  in  baptism,  if 
they  be  good  faithful  Christians ;  yet  thinks  proper  to  men- 
tion that  others  may,  with  propriety,  in  special  cases,  per- 
form the  same  kind  office  of  Christian  charity.     *'  You 
see,"  says  he,  "  that  a  great  many  are  oflTered,  not  by  their 
parents,  but  by  any  other  persons,  as  infant  slaves  are 
sometimes  offered  by  their  masters.    And  sometimes  when 
the  parents  are  dead,  the  infants  are  baptized,  being  offered 
by  any  that  can  afford  to  show  this  compassion  on  them. 
And  sometimes  infants  whom  their  parents  have  cruelly 
exposed,  may  be  taken  up  and  ofiered  in  baptism  by  those 
who  have  no  children  of  their  own,  nor  design  to  have 
any."     Again,  in  his  book  against  the  Donaiists,  speak-'' 
ing  directly  of  infant  baptism,  he  says — "  If  any  one  ask 
for  divine  authority  in  this  matter,  although  that  which  the 
whole  church  practises,  which  was  not  instituted  by  coun- 
cils, but  was  ever  in  use,  is  very  reasonably  believed  to  be 
no  other  than  a  thing  delivered  by  the  authority  of  the  apos- 
tles ;  yet  we  may  besides  take  a  true  estimate,  how  much 
the  sacrament  of  baptism  does  avail  infants,  by  the  circum- 
cision which  God's  ancient  people  received.    For  Abraham 
was  justified  before  he  received  circumcision,  as  Cornelius 
was  endued  with  the  Holy  Spirit  before  he  was  baptized. 
And  yet  the  apostle  says  of  Abraham,  that  he  received  the 
sign  of  circumcision,    "a  seal    of    the   righteousness   of 
faith,"  by  which  he  had  in  heart  believed,  and  it  had  been 
^'  counted  to  him  for  righteousness."     Why  then  was  he 
commanded  to  circumcise  all  his  male  infants  on  the  eighth 
day,  when  they  could  not  yet  believe  with  the  heart,  that 

*  See  Wall's  History,  Part.  I.  ch.  15—19. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  39 

it  might  be  counted  to  them  for  righteousness;  but  for 
this  reason,  because  the  sacrament  is,  in  itself,  of  great 
importance?  Therefore,  as  in  Abraham,  "  the  righteous- 
ness of  faith"  went  before,  and  circumcision,  "the  seal  of 
the  righteousness  of  faith,  came  after;"  so  in  Cornelius, 
the  spiritual  sanctification  by  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
went  before,  and  the  sacrament  of  regeneration,  by  the 
laver  of  baptism,  came  after.  And  as  in  Isaac,  who  was 
circumcised  the  eighth  day,  the  seal  of  the  righteousness 
of  faith  went  before,  and  (as  he  was  a  follower  of  his 
father's  faith)  the  righteousness  itself,  the  seal  whereof  had 
gone  before  in  his  infancy,  came  after ;  so  in  infants  bap- 
tized, the  sacrament  of  regeneration  goes  before,  and  (if 
they  put  in  practice  the  Christian  religion)  conversion  of 
the  heart,  the  mystery  whereof  went  before  in  their  body, 
comes  after.  By  all  which  it  appears,  that  the  sacrament 
of  baptism  is  one  thing,  and  conversion  of  the  heart 
another." 

So  much  for  the  testimony  of  the  Fathers.  To  me,  I 
acknowledge,  this  testimony  carries  with  it  irresistible 
conviction.  It  is,  no  doubt,  conceivable,  considered  in 
itself,  that,  in  three  centuries  from  the  days  of  the  apostles, 
a  very  material  change  might  have  taken  place  in  regard  to 
the  subjects  of  baptism.  But,  that  a  change  so  serious  and 
radical  as  that  of  which  our  Baptist  brethren  speak,  should 
have  been  introduced  without  the  knowledge  of  such  men 
as  have  been  just  quoted,  is  not  conceivable.  That  the 
church  should  have  passed  from  the  practice  of  none  but 
adult  baptism,  to  that  of  the  constant  and  universal  bap- 
tism of  infants,  while  such  a  change  was  utterly  unknown, 
and  never  heard  of,  by  the  most  active,  pious,  and  learned 
men  that  lived  during  that  period,  cannot,  I  must  believe, 
be  imagined  by  any  impartial  mind.  Now  when  Origen, 
Cyprian,  and  Chrysostom,  declare,  not  only  that  the  baptism 
of  infants  was  the  universal  and  unopposed  practice  of  the 
church  in  their  respective  times  and  places  of  residence ; 
and  when  men  of  so  much  acquaintance  with  all  preceding 
writers,  and  so  much  knowledge  of  all  Christendom,  as 
Augustine  and  Pelagius,  declared  that  they  never  heard  of 
any  one  ivlio  claimed  to  be  a  Christian^  either  orthodox  or 
heretic,  who  did  not  maintain  and  practice  infant  bap- 


40  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

tism;  I  say,  to  suppose,  in  the  face  of  such  testimony, 
that  the  practice  of  infant  baptism  crept  in,  as  an  unwar- 
ranted innovation,  between  their  time  and  that  of  the  apos- 
tles, without  the  smallest  notice  of  the  change  having  ever 
reached  their  ears  is,  I  must  be  allowed  to  say,  of  all  in- 
credible suppositions,  one  of  the  most  incredible.  He  who 
can  believe  this,  must,  it  appears  to  me,  be  prepared  to 
make  a  sacrifice  of  all  historical  evidence  at  the  shrine  of 
blind  and  deaf  prejudice. 

It  is  here  also  worthy  of  particular  notice,  that  those 
pious  and  far  famed  witnesses  for  the  truth,  commonly 
known  by  the  name  of  the  Waldenses,  did  undoubtedly 
hold  the  doctrine  of  infant  baptism,  and  practice  accord- 
ingly. In  their  Confessions  of  Faith  and  other  writings, 
drawn  up  between  the  twelfth  and  sixteenth  centuries,  and 
in  which  they  represent  their  creeds  and  usages  as  handed 
down,  from  father  to  son,  for  several  hundred  years  before 
the  Reformation,  they  speak  on  the  subject  before  us  so 
frequently  and  explicitly,  as  to  preclude  all  doubt  in  regard 
to  the  fact  alleged.  The  following  specimen  of  their  lan- 
guage will  satisfy  every  reasonable  inquirer. 

"  Baptism,"  say  they,  "is  administered  in  a  full  congre- 
gation of  the  faithful,  to  the  end  that  he  that  is  received 
into  the  church,  may  be  reputed  and  held  of  all  as  a  Chris- 
tian brother,  and  that  all  the  congregation  may  pray  for 
him,  that  he  may  be  a  Christian  in  heart,  as  he  is  out- 
wardly esteemed  to  be  a  Christian.  And  for  this  cause 
it  is  that  we  present  our  children  in  baptism,  which  ought 
to  be  done  by  those  to  whom  the  children  are  most  nearly 
related,  such  as  their  parents,  or  those  to  whom  God  has 
given  this  charity." 

Again;  referring  to  the  superstitious  additions  to  bap- 
tism which  the  Papists  had  introduced,  they  say,  in  one  of 
their  ecclesiastical  documents, — "The  things  which  are 
not  necessary  in  baptism  are,  the  exorcisms,  the  breath- 
ings, the  sign  of  the  cross  upon  the  head  or  forehead  of  the 
iyifant,  the  salt  put  into  the  mouth,  the  spitde  into  the  ears 
and  nostrils,  the  unction  of  the  breast,  &c.  From  these 
things  many  take  an  occasion  of  error  and  superstition, 
rather  than  of  edifying  and  salvation." 

Understanding  that  their  Popish  neighbours   charged 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  41 

them  with  denying  the  baptism  of  infants,  they  acquit 
themselves  of  this  imputation  as  follows  : 

*' Neither  is  the  time  or  place  appointed  for  those  who 
are  to  be  baptized.  But  charity,  and  the  edification  of  the 
church  and  congregation  ought  to  be  the  rule  in  this 
matter. 

"  Yet,  notwithstanding,  we  bring  our  children  to  he  bap- 
tized; which  they  ought  to  do  to  whom  they  are  most 
nearly  related;  such  as  their  parents,  or  those  whom  God 
hath  inspired  with  such  a  charity." 

*'  True  it  is,"  adds  the  historian,  "  that  being,  for  some 
hundreds  of  years,  constrained  to  suffer  their  children  to  be 
baptized  by  the  Romish  priests,  they  deferred  the  perform- 
ance of  it  as  long  as  possible,  because  they  detested  the 
human  inventions  annexed  to  the  institution  of  that  holy 
sacrament,  which  they  looked  upon  as  so  many  pollutions 
of  it.  And  by  reason  of  their  pastors,  whom  they  called 
Barbes,  being  often  abroad  travelling  in  the  service  of  the 
church,  they  could  not  have  baptism  administered  to  their 
children  by  them.  They,  therefore,  sometimes  kept  them 
long  without  it.  On  account  of  which  delay,  the  priests 
have  charged  them  with  that  reproach.  To  which  charge 
not  only  their  adversaries  have  given  credit,  but  also  7nany 
of  those  who  have  approved  of  their  lives  and  faith  in  all 
other  respects y* 

It  being  so  plainly  a  fact,  established  by  their  own  un- 
equivocal and  repeated  testimony,  that  the  great  body  of 
the  Waldenses  were  Poedobaptists,  on  what  ground  is  it 
that  our  Baptist  brethren  assert,  and  that  some  have  been 
found  to  credit  the  assertion,  that  those  venerable  witnesses 
of  the  truth  rejected  the  baptism  of  infants?  The  answer 
is  easy  and  ample.     A  small  section  of  the  people  bearing 

*  See  John  Paul  Perrin's  account  of  the  Doctrine  and  Order  of 
the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses  ;  Sir  Samuel  Morland's  do. ;  and  also 
Leger's  Histoire  Generale  des  Eglises  Vaudoises,  Mr.  William 
Jones,  a  Baptist,  in  a  work  entitled,  a  History  of  the  Waldenses,  in 
two  volumes  octavo,  professes  to  give  a  full  account  of  the  Faith  and 
Order  of  these  pious  witnesses  of  the  truth  ;  but,  so  far  as  I  have  ob- 
served, carefully  leaves  out  of  all  their  public  formularies  and  other 
documents,  every  thing  which  would  disclose  their  Poedobaptist  prin- 
ciples and  practice  !  On  this  artifice  comment  is  unnecessary. 


4^  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

the  general  name  of  Waldenses,  followers  of  Peter  de 
Bruis,  who  were  mentioned  in  a  preceding  page,  while 
they  agreed  with  the  mass  of  their  denomination  in  most 
other  matters,  differed  from  them  in  regard  to  the  subject 
of  infant  baptism.  They  held,  as  before  stated,  that  infants 
were  not  capable  of  salvation ;  that  Christian  salvation  is 
of  such  a  nature  that  none  can  partake  of  it  but  those  who 
undergo  a  course  of  rigorous  self-denial  and  labour  in  its 
pursuit.  Those  who  die  in  infancy  not  being  capable  of 
this,  the  Petrobrussians  held  that  they  were  not  capable  of 
salvation ;  and,  this  being  the  case,  that  they  ought  not  to 
be  baptized.  This,  however,  is  not  the  doctrine  of  our 
Baptist  brethren;  and,  of  course,  furnishes  no  support  to 
their  creed  or  practice.  But  the  decisive  answer  is,  that 
the  Petrobrussians  were  a  very  small  fraction  of  the  great 
Waldensian  body ;  probably  not  more  than  a  thirtieth  or 
fortieth  part  of  the  whole.  The  great  mass  of  the  denomi- 
nation, however,  as  such,  declare,  in  their  Confessions  of 
Faith,  and  in  various  public  documents,  that  they  held,  and 
that  their  fathers  before  them,  for  many  generations,  always 
held,  to  infant  baptism.  The  Petrobrussians,  in  this  res- 
pect, forsook  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  their  fathers,  and 
departed  from  the  proper  and  established  Waldensian 
creed.  If  there  be  truth  in  the  plainest  records  of  eccle- 
siastical history,  this  is  an  undoubted  fact.  In  short,  the 
real  state  of  this  case  may  be  illustrated  by  the  following 
representation.  Suppose  it  were  alleged,  that  the  Baptists 
in  the  United  States  are  in  the  habit  of  keeping  the  seventh 
day  of  the  week  as  their  Sabbath?  Would  the  statement 
be  true?  By  no  means.  There  is,  indeed,  a  small  section 
of  the  AntipcBdobaptist  body  in  the  United  States,  usually 
styled  "  Seventh  day  Baptists" — probably  not  a  thirtieth 
part  of  the  whole  body — who  observe  Saturday  in  each 
week  as  their  Sabbath.  But,  notwithstanding  this,  the  pro- 
per representation,  no  doubt,  is — (the  only  representation 
that  a  faithful  historian  of  facts  would  pronounce  correct) — 
that  the  Baptists  in  this  country,  as  a  general  body,  ob- 
serve "  the  Lord's  day"  as  their  Sabbath.  You  may  rest 
assured,  my  friends,  that  this  statement  most  exacdy  illus- 
trates the  real  fact  with  regard  to  the  Waldenses  as  Poedo- 
baptists.     Twenty-nine   parts,   at  least,  out  of  thirty,  of 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  43 

the  whole  of  that  body  of  witnesses  for  the  truth,  were 
undoubtedly  Poedobaptists.  The  remaming  thirtieth  part 
departed  from  the  faith  of  their  fathers  in  regard  to  bap- 
tism, but  departed  on  principles  altogether  unlike  those  of 
our  modern  Baptist  brethren. 

I  have  only  one  fact  more  to  state  in  reference  to  the 
pious  Waldenses,  and  that  is,  that  soon  after  the  opening 
of  the  Reformation  by  Luther,  they  sought  intercourse  with 
the  Reformed  churches  of  Geneva  and  France ;  held  com- 
munion with  them ;  received  ministers  from  them ;  and 
appeared  eager  to  testify  their  respect  and  affection  for 
them  as  "brethren  in  the  Lord."  Now  it  is  well  known 
that  the  churches  of  Geneva  and  France,  at  this  time,  were 
in  the  habitual  use  of  infant  baptism.  This  single  fact  is 
sufficient  to  prove  that  the  Waldenses  were  Poedobaptists. 
If  they  had  adopted  the  doctrine  of  our  Baptist  brethren, 
and  laid  the  same  stress  on  it  with  them,  it  is  manifest 
that  such  intercourse  would  have  been  wholly  out  of  the 
question. 

If  these  historical  statements  be  correct,  and  that  they 
are  so,  is  just  as  well  attested  as  any  facts  whatever  in  the 
annals  of  the  church,  the  amount  of  the  whole  is  conclu- 
sive, is  demonstrative,  that,  for  fifteen  hundred  years  after 
Christ,  the  practice  of  infant  baptism  was  universal;  that 
to  this  general  fact  there  was  absolutely  no  exception,  in 
the  whole  Christian  church,  which,  on  principle,  or  even 
analogy,  can  countenance  in  the  least  degree,  modern  Anti- 
poedobaptism ;  that  from  the  time  of  the  apostles  to  the  time 
of  Luther,  the  general,  unopposed,  established  practice  of 
the  church  was  to  regard  the  infant  seed  of  believers  as 
members  of  the  church,  and,  as  such,  to  baptize  them. 

But  this  is  not  all.  If  the  doctrine  of  our  Baptist  bre- 
thren be  correct;  that  is,  if  infant  baptism  be  a  corruption 
and  a  nullity ;  then  it  follows,  from  the  foregoing  his- 
torical statements,  most  inevitably,  that  the  ordinance  of 
baptism  was  lost  for  fifteen  hundred  years  :  yes,  entirely 
lost,  from  the  apostolic  age  till  the  sixteenth  century. 
For  there  was,  manifestly,  "  no  society,  during  that  long 
period,  of  fifteen  centuries,  but  what  was  in  the  habit  of  bap- 
tizing infants."  God  had  no  church,  then,  in  the  world 
for  so  long  a  period.'     Can   this  be  admitted?     Surely 


44  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

not  by  any  one  who  believes  in  the  perpetuity  and  indes- 
tructibility of  the  household  of  faith. 

Nay,  if  the  principle  of  our  Baptist  brethren  be  correct, 
the  ordinance  of  baptism  is  irrecoverably  lost  altogether ; 
that  is,  irrecoverably  without  a  miracle.  Because  if,  dur- 
ing the  long  tract  of  time  that  has  been  mentioned,  there 
was  no  true  baptism  in  the  church  ;  and  if  none  but  bap- 
tized persons  were  capable  of  administering  true  baptism 
to  others  ;  the  consequence  is  plain ;  there  is  no  true  bap- 
tism now  in  the  world  !  But  can  this  be  believed  ?  Can 
we  imagine  that  the  great  Head  of  the  church  would 
permit  one  of  his  own  precious  ordinances  to  be  banished 
entirely  from  the  church  for  many  centuries,  much  less  to 
be  totally  lost?  Surely  the  thought  is  abhorrent  to  every 
Christian  feeling. 

Such  is  an  epitome  of  the  direct  evidence  in  favour  of 
infant  baptism.  To  me,  I  acknowledge,  it  appears  nothing 
short  of  demonstration.  The  invariable  character  of  all 
Jehovah's  dealings  and  covenants  with  the  children  of 
men ;  his  express  appointment,  acted  upon  for  two  thou- 
sand years  by  the  ancient  church ;  the  total  silence  of  the 
New  Testament  as  to  any  retraction  or  repeal  of  this 
privilege  ;  the  evident  and  repeated  examples  of  family 
baptism  in  the  apostolic  age  ;  the  indubitable  testimony  of 
the  practice  of  the  whole  church  on  the  Poedobaptist  plan, 
from  the  time  of  the  apostles  to  the  sixteenth  century, 
including  the  most  respectable  witnesses  for  the  truth  in 
the  dark  ages ;  all  conspire  to  establish  on  the  firmest 
foundation,  the  membership,  and  the  consequent  right  to 
baptism  of  the  infant  seed  of  believers.  If  here  be  no 
divine  warrant,  we  may  despair  of  finding  it  for  any  insti- 
tution in  the  Church  of  Cod. 


SERMON  II. 


OBJECTIONS      ANSWERED, 


"  And  when  she  was  baptized,  and  her  household,  she  besought  us, 
saying — if  ye  have  judged  me  to  be  faithful  to  the  Lord,  come  into 
mine  house,  and  abide  there."     Acts  xvi.  15. 

Having  adduced,  in  the  preceding  discourse,  the  direct 
evidence  in  support  of  Infant  Baptism,  let  us  now  attend 
to  some  of  the  most  common  and  popular  objections^ 
brought  by  our  Baptist  brethren,  against  the  doctrine  which 
we  have  attempted  to  establish.     And, 

1.  The  first  is,  that  we  have  no  direct  warrant  in  the 
New  Testament,  in  so  many  words,  for  Infant  Baptism. 
"  We  are  no  where,"  say  our  opponents,  "in  the  history 
of  the  apostolic  age,  told,  in  express  terms,  either  that  in- 
fants ought  to  be  baptized,  or  that  they  were,  in  fact,  bap- 
tized. Now  is  it  possible  to  account  for  this  omission  on 
the  supposition  that  such  baptism  was  generally  prac- 
tised?" This  objection  has  been  urged  a  thousand  times, 
with  great  confidence,  and  with  no  inconsiderable  effect, 
on  the  minds  of  some  serious  persons  of  small  knowledge, 
and  of  superficial  thought.  But  when  thoroughly  exam- 
ined, it  will,  I  am  persuaded,  appear  destitute  of  all  solid 
foundation. 

For,  in  the  first  place,  even  if  it  were  as  our  Baptist  bre- 
thren suppose ;  that  is,  even  if  no  express  warrant,  in  so 
many  words,  were  found  in  the  New  Testament,  author- 
izing and  directing  infant  baptism,  could  this  reasonably  be 
considered,  upon  Poedobaptist  principles,  unaccountable,  or 
even  wonderful?  The  Poedobaptist  principle,  let  it  be 
borne  in  mind,  is,  that  the  church  under  the  New  Testa- 
ment economy  is  the  same  with  the  church  under  the  Old 
Testament  dispensation ;  that  the  former  was  the  minority 
or  childhood,  the  latter  the  maturity  of  the  visible  king- 


46 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 


dom  of  the  Messiah ;  that  one  of  the  most  striking  features 
in  the  New  Testament  character  of  this  kingdom  is,  a  great 
increase  of  light,  and  enlargement  of  privilege;  that  the 
infant  seed  of  believers  had  been  born  in  covenant  w^ith 
God,  and  their  covenanted  character  marked  and  ratilEied 
by  a  covenant  seal,  for  two  thousand  years  before  Christ 
appeared;  and  that,  if  this  privilege  had  been  intended 
simply  to  be  continued,  no  new  enactment  was  necessary 
to  ascertain  this  intention,  but  merely  allowing  it  to  pro- 
ceed without  interposing  any  change.  This  is  the  ground 
we  take.  Now,  taking  this  ground ;  assuming  as  facts 
what  have  been  just  stated  as  such,  can  any  thing  be 
more  perfectly  natural  than  the  whole  aspect  of  the  New 
Testament  in  relation  to  this  subject?  Very  little,  explicit 
or  formal,  is  said  in  reference  to  the  covenant  standing  of 
children,  on  the  opening  of  the  new  economy,  simply  because 
no  material  alteration  as  to  this  point,  was  intended.  All  the 
first  Christians  having  been  bred  under  the  Jewish  eco- 
nomy, and  having  been  always  accustomed  to  the  enjoy- 
ment of  its  privileges,  would,  of  course,  expect  those  privi- 
leges to  be  continued,  especially,  if  nothing  were  said 
about  their  repeal  or  abridgement.  To  announce  to  these 
Jewish  believers,  that  the  covenant  standing,  and  covenant 
advantages  of  their  beloved  children,  were  not  to  be  with- 
drawn or  curtailed,  if  no  other  alteration  in  reference  to 
this  matter,  than  an  increase  of  privilege  were  intended, 
would  have  been  just  as  unnecessary  as  to  inform  them 
that  the  true  God  was  still  to  be  worshipped,  and  the  aton- 
ing sacrifice  of  the  Messiah  still  regarded  as  the  only 
ground  of  hope.  In  short,  assuming  Poedobaptist  princi- 
ples, we  might  expect  the  New  Testament  to  exhibit  pre- 
cisely the  aspect  which  it  does  exhibit.  Not  to  say,  in  so 
many  words,  that  the  privilege  in  question  was  to  be  con- 
tinued ;  but  all  along  to  speak  as  if  this  were  to  be  taken 
for  granted,  without  an  explicit  enactment ;  to  assure  the 
first  Christians  that  "  the  promise  was  still  to  them  and 
their  children;"  and  not  to  them  only,  but  also  to  "as 
many  as  the  Lord  their  God  should  call"  into  his  visible 
church;  to  tell  them  that,  in  regard  to  this  matter,  the  ad- 
ministration of  his  New  Testament  kingdom  was  to  be 
such  as  to  abolish  all  distinction  of  sex  in  Christian  privi- 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  47 

lege ;  that,  in  Christ,  there  was  to  be  no  longer  a  differ- 
ence made  between  "male  and  female;"  and,  in  confor- 
mity with  this  intimation,  and  as  a  practical  comment  upon 
it,  to  introduce  whole  families  with  the  converted  -parents 
into  the  church,  by  the  appropriate  New  Testament  rite, 
as  had  been  invariably  practised  under  the  Old  Testament 
economy. 

But  now  turn,  for  a  moment,  to  the  opposite  supposi- 
tion ;  to  that  of  our  Baptist  brethren.  They  are  obliged, 
by  their  system,  to  take  for  granted,  that,  after  the  children 
of  the  professing  people  of  God  had  been,  for  nearly  two 
thousand  years,  in  the  enjoyment  of  an  important  cove- 
nant privilege  ;  a  privilege  precious  in  itself,  and  pecu- 
liarly dear  to  the  parental  heart;  it  was  suddenly,  and 
without  explanation,  set  aside :  that  on  the  opening  of  the 
New  Testament  dispensation,  a  dispensation  of  larger 
promises,  and  of  increased  liberality,  this  privilege  was 
abruptly  and  totally  withdrawn;  that  children  were  ejected 
from  their  former  covenant  relation;  that  they  were  no 
longer  the  subjects  of  a  covenant  seal,  or  of  covenant  pro- 
mises ;  and  that  all  this  took  place  without  one  hint  of  any 
reason  for  it  being  given ;  without  one  syllable  being  said, 
in  all  the  numerous  epistles  to  the  churches,  by  any  one 
of  justification  or  apology,  for  so  important  a  change ! 
Nay,  that,  instead  of  such  notice  and  explanation,  a  mode 
of  expression,  under  the  new  economy,  should  be  through- 
out used,  corresponding  with  the  former  practice,  and 
adapted  still  to  convey  the  idea  that  both  parents  and  chil- 
dren stood  in  their  old  relation,  notwithstanding  the  pain- 
ful change  !  Is  this  credible  ?  Can  it  be  believed  by  any 
one  who  is  not  predetermined  to  regard  it  as  true  ? 

But  if  the  New  Testament  economy  does  not  include 
the  church  membership  of  the  infant  seed  of  believers, 
such  a  change,  undoubtedly,  did  take  place,  on  the  com- 
ing in  of  the  new  economy.  The  Jewish  disciples  of 
Christ  saw  their  children  at  once  cut  off  from  the  covenant 
of  promise,  and  denied  its  appropriate  seal,  to  which  they 
had  always  been  accustomed,  and  in  which  the  tenderest 
parental  feelings  were  so  strongly  implicated.  Yet  we 
hear  of  no  complaint  on  their  part.  We  find  not  a  word 
which  seems  intended  to  explain  such  a  change,  or  to  allay 


48  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

the  feelings  of  those  parents  who  could  not  fail,  if  such 
had  been  the  fact,  both  to  feel  and  to  remonstrate. 

I  must  say,  my  friends,  that,  to  my  mind,  this  conside- 
ration, if  there  were  no  other,  is  conclusive.  Instead  of 
our  Baptist  brethren  having  a  right  to  call  upon  us  to  find 
a  direct  warrant  in  the  New  Testament,  in  favour  of  infant 
membership,  we  have  a  right  to  call  upon  them  to  produce 
a  direct  warrant  for  the  great  and  sudden  change  which 
they  allege  took  place.  If  it  be,  as  they  say,  that  the 
New  Testament  is  silent  on  the  subject,  this  very  silence 
is  quite  sufficient  to  destroy  their  cause,  and  to  establish 
ours.  It  affords  proof  positive  that  no  such  change  as  that 
which  is  alleged,  ever  occurred.  That  a  change  so  im- 
portant and  interesting  should  have  been  introduced,  with- 
out one  word  of  explanation  or  apology  on  the  part  of  the 
inspired  apostles,  and  without  one  hint  or  struggle  on  the  part 
of  those  who  had  enjoyed  the  former  privilege  ;  in  short, 
that  the  old  economy,  in  relation  to  this  matter,  should 
have  been  entirely  broken  up,  and  yet  the  whole  subject 
passed  over  by  the  inspired  writers  in  entire  silence,  is 
surely  one  of  the  most  incredible  things  that  can  well  be 
imagined !  He  who  can  believe  it,  must  have  a  mind 
"  fully  set  in  him"  to  embrace  the  system  which  re- 
quires it. 

So  much  on  the  supposition  assumed  by  our  Baptist 
brethren,  that  there  is  no  direct  warrant  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament far  infant  membership,  and  of  course,  none  for  in- 
fant baptism.  Admitting  that  the  New  Testament  is  silent 
on  the  subject,  their  cause  is  ruined.  No  good  reason,  I 
had  almost  said,  no  possible  reason,  can  be  assigned  for 
such  silence,  in  the  circumstances  in  which  the  Christian 
church  was  placed,  but  the  fact  that  things,  as  to  this  point, 
were  to  go  on  as  before.  That  the  old  privilege,  so  dear 
to  the  parent's  heart,  was  to  receive  no  other  change  than 
a  new  seal,  less  burdensome ;  applicable  equally  to  both 
sexes ;  in  a  word,  recognizing,  extending,  and  perpetuat- 
ing all  the  privileges  which  they  had  enjoyed  before. 

But  it  cannot  be  admitted  that  the  New  Testament  con- 
tains no  direct  warrant  for  infant  membership.  The  testi- 
mony adduced  in  the  preceding  discourse  is  surely  worthy, 
to  say  the  least,  of  the  most  serious  regard.     When  the 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  49 

Master  himself  declares  concerning  infants,  "  Of  such  is 
the  kingdom  of  heaven ;"  when  an  inspired  apostle  pro- 
claims— "The  promise  is  to  us  and  our  children;"  and 
when  we  plainly  see,  under  the  apostolical  administration 
of  the  church,  whole  families  received,  in  repeated  in- 
stances, into  the  church,  on  the  professed  faith  of  the  indi- 
viduals who  were  constituted  their  respective  heads,  just 
as  we  know  occurred  under  the  old  economy,  when  the 
membership  of  infants  was  undisputed:  when  we  read 
such  thmgs  as  these  in  the  New  Testament,  we  surely 
cannot  complain  of  the  want  of  testimony  which  ought  to 
satisfy  every  reasonable  inquirer, 

2.  A  second  objection,  often  urged  by  our  Baptist  bre- 
thren, is  drawn  from  what  they  insist  is  the  general  law  of 
positive  institutions.  "  In  cases  of  moral  duty,  say  they, 
we  are  at  liberty  to  argue  from  inference,  from  analogy, 
from  implication;  but  in  regard  to  positive  institutions,  our 
warrant  must  be  direct  and  positive.  Now,  as  we  no 
where  find  in  the  New  Testament  any  positive  direction 
for  baptizing  infants,  the  general  law,  which  must  govern 
in  all  cases  of  positive  institution,  plainly  forbids  it.  Here 
no  inferential  reasoning  can  be  admitted." 

This  argument,  I  am  persuaded,  will  not  be  regarded  as 
forcible  by  any  who  examine  it  with  attention  and  impar- 
tiality. The  whole  principle  is  unsound.  The  fact  is,  in- 
ferential reasoning  may  be,  and  is  in  many  cases,  quite  as 
strong  as  any  other.  Besides,  if  it  be  contended,  that  in 
every  thing  relating  to  positive  institutes,  Ave  must  have 
direct  and  positive  precepts,  the  assumed  principle  will 
prove  too  much. 

Upon  this  principle,  females  ought  never  to  partake  of 
the  Lord's  Supper ;  for  we  have  no  positive  precept,  and 
no  explicit  example  in  the  New  Testament  to  warrant 
them  in  doing  so,  and  yet  our  Baptist  brethren,  forgetting 
their  own  principle,  unite  with  all  Christians  who  consider 
the  sacramental  supper  as  still  obligatory  on  the  church,  in 
admitting  females  to  its  participation.  This  dractice  is,  no 
doubt,  perfectly  right.  It  rests  on  the  most  solid  inferen- 
tial reasoning,  which  may  be  just  as  strong  as  any  other, 
and  which,  in  this  case,  cannot  be  gainsayed  or  resisted. 
But  every  time  our  Baptist  brethren  yield  to  this  reason- 

E 


60  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

ing,  and  act  accordingly,  they  desert  their  assumed  prin- 
ciple. 

3.  A  third  objection  frequently  urged  is,  that  if  infant 
baptism  had  prevailed  in  the  primitive  church,  ive  might 
have  expected  to  find  in  the  New  Testament  history  some 
examples  of  the  children  of  professing  Christians  being 
baptized  in  their  infancy.  Our  Baptist  brethren  remind 
us  that  the  New  Testament  history  embraces  a  period  of 
more  than  sixty  years  after  the  organization  of  the  church, 
under  the  new  economy.  "Now,"  say  they,  "during  this 
long  period,  if  the  principle  and  practice  of  infant  baptism 
had  been  the  law  of  the  church,  we  must,  in  all  probability, 
have  found  many  instances  recorded  of  the  baptism  of  the 
children  of  persons  already  in  the  communion  of  the 
church.  Whereas,  in  all  that  is  distinctly  recorded,  or  oc- 
casionally hinted  at,  concerning  the  churches  of  Jerusalem, 
Antioch,  Corinth,  Ephesus,  Rome,  Gallatia,  Colosse,  &;c., 
we  find  no  mention  made  of  such  baptisms.  We,  there- 
fore, conclude  that  none  such  occun*ed." 

This  objection,  when  examined,  will  be  found,  it  is  be- 
lieved, to  have  quite  as  little  weight  as  the  preceding. 
The  principal  object  of  the  New  Testament  history  is  to 
give  an  account  of  the  progress  of  the  Gospel.  Hence  it 
was  much  more  to  the  purpose  of  the  sacred  writers  to 
inform  us  respecting  the  conversions  to  Christianity,  from 
Judaism  and  Paganism,  than  to  dwell  in  detail  on  what  oc- 
curred in  the  bosom  of  the  church  itself.  Only  enough  is 
said  on  the  latter  subject  to  trace  the  disturbances  which 
occurred  in  the  churches  to  their  proper  source,  and  to 
render  intelligible  and  impressive  the  various  precepts  in 
relation  to  these  matters  which  are  recorded  for  the  in- 
struction of  the  people  of  God  in  all  ages.  Hence  all  the 
cases  of  baptism  which  are  recorded,  are  cases  in  which 
it  was  administered  to  converts  from  Judaism  or  Pagan- 
ism, to  Christianity.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  we 
have  no  example  of  a  single  baptism  of  any  other  kind. 
Now  this,  upon  Pcedobaptist  principles,  is  precisely  what 
might  have  been  expected.  In  giving  a  history  of  such 
churches,  who  would  think  of  singling  out  cases  of  infant 
baptism?  This  is  a  matter  so  much  of  course,  and  of 
every  day's  occurrence,  that  it  is  in  no  respect  a  remark- 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  51 

able  event,  and,  of  course,  could  not  be  expected  to  be  re- 
corded as  such.  No  wonder,  then,  that  we  find  no  in- 
stance of  this  kind  specified  in  the  annals  of  the  apostolical 
church. 

But  this  is  not  all.  There  is  connected  with  this  fact, 
a  still  more  serious  difficulty,  which  cannot  fail  of  bearing 
v/ith  most  unfriendly  weight  on  the  Baptist  cause.  Though 
it  is  not  wonderful,  for  the  reason  just  mentioned,  that  we 
read  of  no  cases  of  infant  baptism  among  the  Christian 
families  of  the  apostolical  age;  yet,  upon  Baptist  princi- 
ples, it  is  much  more  difficult  to  be  accounted  for,  that  we 
find  no  example  of  persons  born  of  Christian  parents  being 
baptized  in  adult  age.  Upon  those  principles,  the  chil- 
dren of  professing  Christians  bear  no  relation  to  the  church. 
They  are  as  completely  "  without"  as  the  children  of 
Pagans  or  Mohammedans,  until  by  faith  and  repentance 
they  are  brought  within  the  bond  of  the  covenant.  Their 
being  converted  and  baptized,  then,  we  might  expect  to  be 
just  as  carefully  noticed,  and  just  as  minutely  detailed,  as 
the  conversion  and  baptism  of  the  most  complete  "  aliens 
from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel."  Yet  the  fact  is,  that 
during  the  whole  three  score  years  after  the  ascension  of 
Christ,  which  the  New  Testament  history  embraces,  we 
have  no  hint  of  the  baptism  of  any  adult  born  of  Christian 
parents.  In  my  judgment,  this  fact  bears  very  strongly 
in  favour  of  the  Poedobaptist  cause. 

4.  It  is  objected,  that  Jesus  Christ  himself  was  not  bap- 
tized until  he  was  thirty  years  of  age;  and,  therefore,  it 
is  inferred,  that  his  disciples  ought  not  to  be  baptized  un- 
til they  reach  adidt  age.     To  this  objection  I  reply 

(1.)  Christ  was  baptized  by  John.  Now  it  is  certain, 
that  John's  Baptism  was  not  Christian  baptism:  for  it  is  evi- 
dent, from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  (chap.  xix.  1-5.)  that 
those  who  were  baptized  by  John,  were  baptized  over 
again,  "in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus."  Besides,  it  is 
evident,  from  the  whole  passage,  that  the  baptism  of 
Christ  by  John  was  an  essentially  different  thing  from 
baptism  as  now  practised  in  the  Christian  church.  The 
ministry  of  John  the  Baptist  was  a  dispensation,  if  we 
may  say  so,  intermediate  between  the  Old  and  the  New 
Testament  economies.     And,  as  our  blessed  Lord  thought 


52  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

proper  to  "  fulfil  all  righteousness,"  he  submitted  to  the 
baptismal  rite  which  marked  th?t  dispensation.  Be- 
sides, under  the  Old  Testament  economy,  when  the 
High  Priest  first  entered  on  his  holy  office,  he  was  so- 
lemnly washed  with  water.  And  that  ofiicer,  Ave  know, 
was  wont  to  come  to  the  discharge  of  his  functions 
at  "  about  thirty  years  of  age,"  the  very  age  at  which  our 
Saviour  was  baptized,  and  entered  on  his  public  ministry. 
In  like  manner,  when  the  "great  High  Priest  of  our  pro- 
fession," Christ  Jesus,  entered  on  his  public  ministry,  he 
thought  proper  to  comply  with  the  same  ceremony ;  that 
he  might  acccomplish  the  prophecy,  and  fulfil  all  the  typical 
representations  concerning  the  Saviour,  which  had  been 
left  on  record  in  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.  The  bap- 
tism of  Christ,  then,  has  no  reference  to  this  controversy, 
and  cannot  be  made  to  speak  either  for  or  against  our  prac- 
tice in  regard  to  this  ordinance.     But 

(2.)  If  this  argument  have  any  force,  it  proves  more 
than  our  Baptist  brethren  are  willing  to  allow,  viz :  that 
no  person  ought  to  be  baptized  under  thirty  years  of  age. 
So  that  even  a  real  Christian,  however  clear  his  evidences 
of  faith  and  repentance,  though  he  be  twenty,  twenty- 
Jive.,  or  even  twenty-nine  years  of  age,  must  in  no  case 
think  of  being  baptized  until  he  has  reached  the  full 
age  of  thirty.  A  consequence  so  replete  with  absurdity, 
that  the  simple  statement  of  it  is  -enough  to  insure  its  refu- 
tation. 

5.  A  fifth  objection  continually  made  by  our  Baptist 
brethren  is,  that  infants  are  not  capable  of  those  spiritual 
acts  or  exercises  which  the  New  Testament  requires  in 
order  to  a  proper  reception  of  the  ordinance  of  Baptism. 
Thus  the  language  of  the  New  Testament,  on  various  oc- 
casions, is — "  Repent,  and  be  baptized.  Believe,  and  be 
baptized.  If  thou  believest  with  all  thine  heart,  thou  may- 
est  be  baptized.  They  that  gladly  received  the  word  were 
baptized.  Many  of  the  Corinthians,  having  believed, 
were  baptized."  In  short,  say  our  Baptist  brethren,  as 
baptism  is  acknowledged  on  all  hands  to  be  a  "  seal  of 
the  righteousness  of  faith ;"  and  as  infants  are  altogether 
incapable  of  exercising  faith ;  it  is,  of  course,  not  proper 
to  baptize  them. 


8t:RM0NS    ON    BAPTISM.  53 

In  answer  to  this  objection,  my  first  remark  is,  that  all 
those  exhortations  to  faith  and  repentance,  as  prerequisites 
to  baptism,  which  we  find  in  the  New  Testament,  are 
addressed  to  adult  persons.  And  when  we  are  called  to 
instruct  adult  persons,  who  have  never  been  baptized,  we 
always  address  them  precisely  in  the  same  way  in  which 
the  apostles  did.  We  exhort  them  to  repent  and  believe, 
and  w^e  say,  just  as  Philip  said,  "If  thou  belie  vest  with  all 
thine  heart,  thou  mayest  be  baptized."  But  this  does  not 
touch  the  question  respecting  the  infant  seed  of  believers. 
It  only  shows  that  when  adults  are  baptized,  such  a  quali- 
fication is  to  be  urged,  and  such  a  profession  required. 
And  in  this,  ail  Pcedobaptists  unanimously  agree. 

But   still,   our   Baptist   brethren,   unsatisfied    with    this 
answer,  insist,  that,  as  infants  are  not  capable  of  exercising 
faith ;  as  they  are  not  capable  of  acting  either  intelligently 
or  voluntarily  in  the  case  at  all,  they  cannot  be  considered 
as  the  proder  recipients  of  an  ordinance  which  is  repre- 
sented as  a  "seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith."     This 
objection  is  urged  with  unceasing  confidence,  and  not  sel- 
dom accompanied  with  sneer  and  even  ridicule,  at  the  idea 
of  applying  a  covenant  seal  to  those  who  are  incapable  of 
either  understanding,  or  giving  their  consent,  to  the  trans- 
action.    It  is  really,  my  friends,  enough  to  make  one  shud- 
der to  think  how  often,  and  how  unceremoniously  language 
of  this  kind  is  employed  by  those  who  acknowledge  that 
infants  of  eight  days  old,  were  once,  and  that  by  express 
Divine  appointment,  made  the  subjects  of  circumcision. 
Now  circumcision  is  expressly  said  by  the  apostle  to  be 
a  "seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,"  as  well  as  baptism. 
But  were  children  of  eight  days  old  then  capable  of  exer- 
cising faith,  when  they  were  circumcised,  more  than  they 
are  now  when  they  are  baptized?     Surely  the  objection 
before  us  is  as  valid  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other.     And, 
whether  our  Baptist  brethren  perceive  it  or  not,  all  the 
charges  of  "absurdity"  and  "impiety"  which  they  are  so 
ready  to  heap  on  infant  baptism,  are  just  as  applicable  to 
infant  circumcision  as  to  infant  baptism.     Are  they,  then, 
willing  to  say,  that  the  application  of  a  "  seal  of  the  righte- 
ousness of  faith"  to  unconscious  infants,  of  eight  days  old, 
who,  of  course,  could  not  exercise  faith,  was,  under  the 

E* 


54  SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM. 

old  economy,  preposterous  and  absurd?  Are  they  pre- 
pared thus  to  "charge  God  foolishly?"  Yet  they  must 
do  it,  if  they  would  be  consistent.  They  cannot  escape 
from  the  shocking  alternative.  Every  harsh  and  contempt- 
uous epithet  which  they  apply  to  infant  baptism,  must,  if 
they  would  adhere  to  the  principles  which  they  lay  down, 
be  applied  to  infant  circumcision.  But  that  which  una- 
voidably leads  to  such  a  consequence  cannot  be  warranted 
by  the  word  of  God. 

After  all,  the  whole  weight  of  the  objection,  in  this  case, 
is  founded  on  an  entire  forge tfulness  of  the  main  principle 
of  the  Poedobaptist  system.  It  is  forgotten  that  in  every 
case  of  infant  baptism,  faith  is  required,  and,  if  the  parents 
be  sincere,  is  actually  exercised.  But  it  is  required  of  the 
parents,  not  of  the  children.  So  that,  if  the  parent  really 
present  his  child  in  faith,  the  spirit  of  the  ordinance  is 
entirely  met  and  answered.  It  was  this  principle  which 
gave  meaning  and  legitimacy  to  the  administration  of  the 
corresponding  rite  under  the  old  dispensation.  It  was 
because  the  parents  were  visibly  within  the  bond  of  thei 
covenant,  that  their  children  were  entitled  to  the  same 
blessed  privilege.  The  same  principle  precisely  applies 
under  the  New  Testament  economy.  Nor  does  it  impair  the 
force  of  this  consideration  to  allege,  that  pai'ents,  it  is  feared, 
too  often  present  their  children,  in  this  solemn  ordinance, 
without  genuine  faith.  It  is,  indeed,  probable  that  this  is 
often  lamentably  the  fact.  But  so  it  was,  we  cannot 
doubt,  with  respect  to  the  corresponding  ordinance,  under 
the  old  dispensation.  Yet  the  circumcision  was  neither 
invalidated,  nor  rendered  unmeaning,  by  this  want  of  sin- 
cerity on  the  part  of  the  parent.  It  was  sufficient  for  the 
visible  administration  that  faith  was  visibly  professed. 
When  our  Baptist  brethren  administer  the  ordinance  of 
baptism  to  one  who  professes  to  i^epent  and  believe,  but 
who  is  not  sincere  in  this  profession,  they  do  not  consider 
his  want  of  faith  as  divesting  the  ordinance  of  either  its 
warrant  or  its  meaning.  The  administration  may  be  regu- 
lar and  scriptural,  while  the  recipient  is  criminal,  and 
receives  no  spiritual  benefit.  It  is,  in  every  case,  the  pro-^ 
fession  of  faith  which  gives  the  right,  in  the  eye  of  the 
church,  to  the  external  ordinance.     The  want  of  sincerity 


SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM. 


55 


in  this  profession,  while  it  deeply  inculpates  the  hypocriti- 
cal individual,  affects  not  either  the  nature  or  the  warrant 
of  the  administration. 

6.  Again;  it  is  objected,  that  baptism  can  do  infants  no 
good.  "  Where,"  say  our  Baptist  brethren,  "  is  the  benefit 
of  it?  What  good  can  a  little  'sprinkling  with  water'  do 
a  helpless,  unconscious  babe?''  To  this  objection  I  might 
reply,  by  asking,  in  my  turn — What  good  did  circumcision 
do  a  Jewish  child,  helpless  and  unconscious,  at  eight  days 
old?  To  ask  the  question  is  almost  impious,  because  it 
implies  an  impeachment  of  infinite  wisdom.*  God  ap- 
pointed that  ordinance  to  be  administered  to  infants.  And, 
accordingly,  when  the  apostle  asked,  in  the  spirit  of  some 
modern  cavillers,  "What  profit  is  there  of  circumcision?" 
He  replies,  much,  every  ivay.  In  like  manner,  when  it 
is  asked,  "What  profit  is  there  in  baptising  our  infant 
children?"  1  answer.  Much,  everyway.  Baptism  is  a 
sign  of  many  important  truths,  and  a  seal  of  many  impor- 
tant covenant  blessings.  Is  there  no  advantage  in  attend- 
ing on  an  ordinance  which  holds  up  to  our  view,  in  the 
most  impressive  symbolical  language,  several  of  those 
fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  which  are  of  the  deep- 
est interest  to  us  and  our  offspring;  such  as  our  fallen, 
guilty,  and  polluted  state  by  nature,  and  the  method  ap- 
pointed by  infinite  wisdom  and  love  for  our  recovery,  by 
the  atoning  blood,  and  cleansing  Spirit  of  the  Saviour?  Is 
there  no  advantage  in  solemnly  dedicating  our  children  to 
God,  by  an  appropriate  rite,  of  his  own  appointment?  Is 
there  no  advantage  in  formally  binding  ourselves,  by  cove- 
nant engagements,  to  bring  up  our  offspring  "in  the  nur- 
ture and  admonition  of  the  Lord?"  Is  there  no  advantage 
in  publicly  ratifying  the  connection  of  our  children,  as  well 
as  ourselves,  with  the  visible  church,  and  as  it  were  bind- 
ing them  to  an  alliance  with  the  God  of  their  fathers  ?  Is 
there  nothing,  either  comforting  or  useful  in  solemnly  re- 
cognising as   our  own   that  covenant  promise,    "  I   will 

*  A  grave  and  respectable  Baptist  minister,  in  the  course  of  an 
argument  on  this  subject,  cundidJy  acknowledged  that  the  adminis- 
tration of  circumcision  to  an  infant  eight  days  old,  would  have  appear- 
ed  to  him  a  useless,  and  even  a  silly  rite  I  An  honest,  and  certainly 
a  very  natural  confession  I 


56  SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM. 

establish  my  covenant  between  me  and  tliee,  and  thy  seed 
after  thee,  to  be  a  God  to  thee  and  thy  seed  after  thee?  Is 
it  a  step  of  no  value  to  our  children  themselves,  to  be 
brought,  by  a  divinely  appointed  ordinance,  into  the  bosom, 
and  to  the  notice,  the  maternal  attentions,  and  the  prayers 
of  the  church,  "the  mother  of  us  all?"  And  is  it  of  no 
advantage  to  the  parents,  in  educating  their  children,  to  be 
able  to  remind  them,  from  time  to  time,  that  they  have 
been  symbolically  sanctified,  or  set  apart,  by  the  seal  of 
Jehovah's  covenant,  and  to  plead  with  them  by  the  solemn 
vows  which  they  have  made  on  tlieir  behalf?  Verily,  my 
dear  friends,  those  who  refuse  or  neglect  the  baptism  of 
their  children,  not  only  sin  against  Christ,  by  disobeying 
his  solemn  command;  but  they  also  deprive  both  them- 
selves and  their  children  of  great  benefits.  They  may 
imagine  that,  as  it  is  a  disputed  point,  it  may  be  a  matter  of 
indifference,  whether  their  children  receive  this  ordinance 
in  their  infancy,  or  grow  up  unbaptized.  But  is  not  this 
attempting  to  be  wiser  than  God?  I  do  not  profess  to 
know  all  the  advantages  attendant  or  consequent  on  the 
administration  of  this  significant  and  divinely  appointed 
rite;  but  one  thing  I  know,  and  that  is,,  that  Christ  has 
appointed  it  as  a  sign  of  precious  truths,  and  a  seal  of  rich 
Messings,  to  his  covenant  people,  and  their  infant  offspring; 
and  I  have  no  doubt  that,  in  a  multitude  of  cases,  the  bap- 
tized children,  presented  by  professing  parents  who  had  no 
true  faith,  but  who,  by  this  act,  brought  their  children 
within  the  care,  the  watch,  and  the  privileges  of  the 
church,  have  been  instrumental  in  conferring  upon  their 
offspring  rich  benefits,  while  they  themselves  went  down 
to  everlasting  burnings.  If  I  mistake  not,  I  have  seen 
many  cases,  in  which,  as  far  as  the  eye  of  man  could  go, 
the  truth  of  this  remark  has  been  signally  exemplified. 

Let  it  not  be  said,  that  such  a  solemn  dedication  of  a 
child  to  God,  is  usurping  the  rights  of  the  child  to  judge 
and  act  for  himself,  when  he  comes  to  years  of  discretion; 
and  that  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  privilege  of  every  ra- 
tional being  to  free  inquiry,  and  free  agency.  This  ob- 
jection is  founded  on  an  infidel  spirit.  It  is  equally  op- 
posed to  the  religious  education  of  children ;  and,  if  fol- 
lowed out,  would  militate  against  all  those  restraints,  and 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  57 

that  instruction  which  the  Word  of  God  enjoins  on  pa- 
rents. Nay,  if  the  principle  of  this  objection  be  correct, 
it  is  wrong  to  pre-occupy  the  minds  of  our  children  with 
an  abhorrence  of  lying,  theft,  drunkenness,  malice,  and 
murder ;  lest,  forsooth,  we  should  fill  them  with  such  pre- 
judices as  would  be  unfriendly  to  free  inquiry. 

The  truth  is,  one  great  purpose  for  which  the  church 
was  instituted,  is  to  watch  over  and  train  up  children  in 
the  knowledge  and  fear  of  God,  and  thus,  to  "prepare  a 
seed  to  serve  him,  who  should  be  accounted  to  the  Lord 
for  a  generation."  And  I  will  venture  to  say,  that  that 
system  of  religion  which  does  not  embrace  children  in  its 
ecclesiastical  provisions,  and  in  its  covenant  engagements, 
is  most  materially  defective.  Infants  may  not  receive  any 
apparent  benefit  from  baptism,  at  the  moment  in  which 
the  ordinance  is  administered ;  although  a  gracious  God 
may,  even  then,  accompany  the  outward  emblem  with  the 
blessing  which  it  represents,  even  "  the  washing  of  re- 
generation, and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  This, 
indeed,  may  not  be,  and  most  commonly,  so  far  as  we  can 
judge,  is  not  the  case.  But  still  the  benefits  of  this  ordi- 
nance, when  faithfully  applied  by  ministers,  and  faithfully 
received  by  parents,  are  abundant — nay,  great  and  impor- 
tant every  way.  When  children  are  baptized,  they  are 
thereby  recognized  as  belonging  to  the  visible  church  of 
God.  They  are,  as  it  were,  solemnly  entered  as  scholars 
or  disciples  in  the  school  of  Christ.  They  are  1  rought 
into  a  situation,  in  which  they  not  only  may  be  trained  up 
for  God,  but  in  which  their  parents  are  bound  so  to  train 
them  up ;  and  the  church  is  bound  to  see  that  they  be  so 
trained,  as  that  the  Lord's  claim  to  them  shall  ever  be  re- 
cognized and  maintained.  In  a  Avord,  by  baptism,  when 
the  administrators  and  recipients  are  both  faithful  to  their 
respective  trusts,  children  are  brought  into  a  situation  in 
which  all  the  means  of  grace  ;  all  the  privileges  pertain- 
ing to  Christ's  covenanted  family ;  in  a  word,  all  that  is 
comprehended  under  the  broad  and  precious  import  of  the 
term  Christian  education,  is  secured  to  them  in  the  most 
ample  manner.  Let  parents  think  of  this,  when  they 
come  to  present  their  children  in  this  holy  ordinance. 
And  let  children  lay  all  this  to  heart,  when  they  come  to 


58  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

years  in  which  they  are  capable  of  remembering  and  Eeal- 
izing  their  solemn  responsibility. 

7.  A  seventh  objection  which  our  Baptist  brethren  fre- 
quently urge  is,  that,  upon  our  plan,  the  result  of  baptism 
seldom  corresponds  with  its  professed  meaning.  We  say 
it  is  a  symbol  of  regeneration ;  but  experie7ice  proves  that 
a  great  majority  of  those  infants  who  are  baptized ^^  never 
partake  of  the  grace  of  regeneration.  The  practice  of 
Poedobaptists,  they  tell  us,  is  adapted  to  corrupt  the  church 
to  the  most  extreme  degree,  by  filling  it  with  unconverted 
persons.     To  this  objection  we  reply  : 

That  baptism  is  not  more  generally  connected  or  fol- 
lowed with  that  spiritual  benefit  of  which  it  is  a  striking 
emblem,  is  indeed  to  be  lamented.  But  still  this  acknow- 
ledged fact  does  not,  it  is  believed,  either  destroy  the  sig- 
nificance of  the  ordinance,  or  prove  it  to  be  useless.  If  it 
hold  up  to  view,  to  all  who  behold  it,  every  time  that  it  is 
administered,  the  nature  and  necessity  of  regeneration  by 
the  Holy  Spirit;  if  it  enjoin,  and,  to  a  very  desirable  ex- 
tent, secure,  to  the  children  of  the  church  enlightened  and 
faithful  instruction,  in  the  great  doctrines  of  the  Gospel, 
and  this  doctrine  of  spiritual  cleansing  in  particular;  and 
if  it  is,  in  a  multitude  of  cases,  actually  connected  with 
precious  privileges,  and  saving  benefits ;  we  have,  surely, 
no  right  to  conclude  that  it  is  of  small  advantage,  because 
it  is  not  in  all  cases  followed  by  the  blessing  which  it 
symbolically  represents.  How  many  read  the  Bible  with- 
out profit !  How  many  attend  upon  the  external  service 
of  prayer,  without  sincerity,  and  without  a  saving  bless- 
ing! But  are  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  and  the  duty 
of  prayer  less  obligatory,  or  of  more  dubious  value  on  that 
account?  In  truth,  the  same  objection  might  be  made  to 
circumcision.  That,  as  well  as  baptism,  was  a  symbol  of 
regeneration,  and  of  spiritual  cleansing :  but  how  many  re- 
ceived the  outward  symbol  without  the  spiritual  benefit  ? 
The  fact  is,  the  same  objection  may  be  brought  against 
every  institution  of  God.  They  are  all  richly  significant, 
?ind  abound  in  spiritual  meaning,  and  in  spiritual  instruc- 
tion ;  but  their  influence  is  moral,  and  may  be  defeated  by 
unbelief.  They  cannot  exert  a  physical  power,  or  convert 
and  save  by  their  inherent  energy,     Hence  they  are  often 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  59 

attended  by  many  individuals,  without  benefit ;  but  still 
their  administration  is  by  no  means,  in  respect  to  the 
church  of  God,  in  vain  in  the  Lord.  It  is  daily  exerting 
an  influence  of  which  no  human  arithmetic  can  form  an 
accurate  estimate.  Thousands,  no  doubt,  even  of  baptized 
adults  receive  the  ordinance  without  faith,  and,  of  course, 
without  saving  profit.  But  thousands  more  receive  it  in 
faith,  and  in  connexion  with  those  precious  benefits  of 
which  it  is  a  symbol.  This  is  the  case  with  all  ordi- 
nances ;  but  because  they  are  not  always  connected  with 
saving  benefits,  we  are  neither  to  disparage,  nor  cease  to 
recommend  them. 

But  if  baptism  be  a  symbol  of  regeneration ;  if  it  hold 
forth  to  all  who  receive  it,  either  for  themselves  or  their 
offspring,  the  importance  and  necessity  of  this  great  work 
of  God's  grace ;  if  it  bind  them  to  teach  their  children,  as 
soon  as  they  become  capable  of  receiving  instruction,  this 
vital  truth,  as  well  as  all  the  other  fundamental  truths  of 
our  holy  religion  ;  if,  in  consequence  of  their  baptism, 
children  are  recognized  as  bearing  a  most  important  rela- 
tion to  the  church  of  God,  as  bound  by  her  rules,  and 
responsible  to  her  tribunal ;  and  if  all  these  principles  be 
faithfully  carried  out  into  practice ;  can  our  children  be 
placed  in  circumstances  more  favourable  to  their  moral 
benefit  ?  If  not  regenerated  at  the  time  of  baptism,  (which 
the  nature  of  the  ordinance  does  not  necessarily  imply) 
are  they  not,  in  virtue  of  their  connexion  with  the  church, 
thus  ratified  and  sealed,  placed  in  the  best  of  all  schools  for 
learning,  practically,  as  well  as  doctrinally,  the  things  of 
God?  Are  they  not,  by  these  means,  even  when  they 
fail  of  becoming  pious,  restrained  and  regulated,  and  made 
better  members  of  society?  And  are  not  multitudes  of 
them,  after  all,  brought  back  from  their  temporary  wan- 
derings, and  by  the  reviving  influence  of  their  baptismal 
seal,  and  their  early  training,  made  wise  unto  salvation  ? 
Let  none  say,  then,  that  infant  baptism  seldom  realizes  its 
symbolical  meaning.  It  is,  I  apprehend,  made  to  do  this 
far  more  frequendy  than  is  commonly  imagined.  And  if 
those  who  offer  them  up  to  God  in  this  ordinance,  were 
more  faithful,  this  favourable  result  would  occur  with  a 
frequency  more  than  tenfold. 


60  SERMONS  ON  BAPl'lSM. 

8.  A  further  objection  often  urged  by  the  opponents  of 
infant  baptism  is,  that  we  have  the  same  historical  evi- 
dence for  infant  communion  that  we  have  infant  bap- 
tism; and  that  the  evidence  of  the  former  in  the  early- 
history  of  the  church,  altogether  invalidates  the  historical 
testimony  which  we  find  in  favour  of  the  latter. 

In  reply  to  this  objection,  it  is  freely  granted,  that 
the  practice  of  administering  the  eucharist  to  children, 
and  sometimes  even  to  very  young  children,  infants,  has 
been  in  use  in  various  parts  of  the  Christian  church, 
from  an  early  period,  and  is,  in  some  parts  of  the 
nominally  Christian  world,  still  maintained.  About  the 
middle  of  the  third  century,  we  hear  of  it  in  some  of  the 
African  churches.  A  misconception  of  the  Saviour's 
words — "  Except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man,  and 
and  drink  his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you;"  led  many  to 
believe  that  a  participation  of  the  Lord's  supper  was  essen- 
tial to  salvation.  They  were,  therefore,  led  to  give  a 
small  portion  of  the  sacramental  bread  dipped  in  wine  to 
children,  and  dying  persons,  who  were  not  able  to  receive 
it  in  the  usual  form ;  and,  in  some  cases,  we  find  that  this 
morsel  of  bread  moistened  with  the  consecrated  wine  was 
even  forced  down  the  throats  of  infants,  who  were  reluc- 
tant or  unable  to  swallow  it.  Nay,  to  so  revolting  a  length 
was  this  superstition  carried,  in  a  few  churches,  that  the 
consecrated  bread  and  wine  united  in  the  same  manner  as 
in  the  case  of  infants,  were  thrust  into  the  mouths  of  the 
dead^  who  had  departed  without  receiving  them  during  life ! 

But  it  is  doing  great  injustice  to  the  cause  of  infant  bap- 
tism to  represent  it  as  resting  on  no  better  ground  than  the 
practice  of  infant  communion.  The  following  points  of 
difference  are  manifest,  and  appear  to  me  perfectly  conclu- 
sive. 

(1.)  Infant  communion  derives  not  the  smallest  counte- 
nance from  the  Word  of  God;  whereas,  with  regard  to 
infant  baptism,  we  find  in  Scripture  its  most  solid  and  deci- 
sive support.  It  would  rest  on  a  firm  foundation  if  every 
testimony  out  of  the  Bible  were  destroyed. 

(2.)  The  historical  testimony  in  favour  of  infant  commu- 
nion, is  greatly  inferior  to  that  which  we  possess  in 
favour  of  infant  baptism.     We  have  no  hint  of  the  former 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  61 

having  been  in  use  in  any  church  until  the  time  of  Cy- 
prian, about  the  middle  of  the  third  century ;  whereas 
testimony  more  or  less  clear  in  favour  of  the  latter  has 
come  down  to  us  from  the  apostolic  age. 

(3.)  Once  more :  Infant  communion  by  no  means  stands 
on  a  level  with  infant  baptism  as  to  its  universal  or  even 
general  reception.  We  find  two  eminent  men  in  the 
fourth  century,  among  the  most  learned  then  on  earth,  and 
who  had  enjoyed  the  best  opportunity  of  becoming  ac- 
quainted with  the  whole  church,  declaring  that  the  bap- 
tism of  infants  was  a  practice  which  had  come  down  from 
the  apostles,  and  was  universally  practised  in  the  church  ; 
nay,  that  they  had  never  heard  of  any  professing  Chris- 
tians in  the  world,  either  orthodox  or  heretical,  who  did 
not  baptize  their  children.  But  we  have  no  testimony  ap- 
proaching this,  in  proof  of  the  early  and  universal  adoption 
of  infant  communion.  It  was  manifestly  an  innovation, 
founded  on  principles  which,  though,  to  a  melancholy  de- 
gree prevalent,  were  never  universally  received.  And  as 
miserable  superstition  brought  it  into  the  church,  so  a 
still  more  miserable  superstition  destroyed  it.  When 
transubstantiation  arose,  the  sacred  elements,  (now  trans- 
muted, as  was  supposed,  into  the  real  body  and  blood  of 
the  Saviour)  began  to  be  considered  as  too  awful  in  their 
character  to  be  imparted  to  children.  But  in  the  Greek 
church,  who  separated  from  the  Latin  before  transubstan- 
tiation was  established,  the  practice  of  infant  communion 
still  superstitiously  continues. 

9.  Again :  It  is  objected  that  Pcedobaptists  are  not  con- 
sistent  with  themselves,  in  that  they  do  not  treat  their 
children  as  if  they  were  members  of  the  church.  "  Pcedo- 
baptists," say  our  Baptist  brethren,  "  maintain  that  the 
children  of  professing  Christians  are,  in  virtue  of  their 
birth,  members  of  the  church — plenary  members — exter- 
nally in  covenant  with  God,  and  as  such  made  the  subjects 
of  a  sacramental  seal.  Yet  we  seldom  or  never  see  a 
Pcedobaptist  church  treating  her  baptized  children  as 
church  members,  that  is,  instructing,  watching  over,  and 
disciplining  them,  as  in  the  case  of  adult  members.  Does 
not  this  manifest  that  their  system  is  inconsistent  with  it- 
self, impracticable,  and  therefore  unsound  ?"     This  objec- 


&i  SERMONS   ON    BAPTISM. 

tion  is  a  most  serious  and  weighty  one,  and  ought  to  en- 
gage the  conscientious  attention  of  every  Poedobaptist  who 
wishes  to  maintain  his  profession  with  consistency  and  to 
edification. 

It  cannot  be  denied,  then,  that  the  great  mass  of  the 
Poedobaptist  churches,  do  act  inconsistently  in  regard  to 
this  matter.  They  do  not  carry  out,  and  apply  their  own 
system  by  a  corresponding  practice.  That  baptized  chil- 
dren should  be  treated  by  the  church  and  her  officers  just 
as  other  childen  are  treated :  that  they  should  receive  the 
seal  of  a  covenant  relation  to  God  and  his  people,  and 
then  be  left  to  negligence  and  sin,  without  official  inspec- 
tion, and  without  discipline,  precisely  as  those  are  left  who 
bear  no  relation  to  the  church,  is,  it  must  be  confessed, 
altogether  inconsistent  with  the  nature  and  design  of  the 
ordinance,  and  in  a  high  degree  unfriendly  to  the  best  in- 
terests of  the  Church  of  God.  This  distressing  fact,  how- 
ever, as  has  been  often  observed,  militates,  not  against  the 
doctrine  itself,  of  infant  membership,  but  against  the  in- 
consistency of  those  who  profess  to  adopt  and  to  act 
upon  it. 

If  one  great  end  of  instituting  a  church,  as  was  before 
observed,  is  the  training  up  of  a  godly  seed  in  the  way 
of  truth,  holiness,  and  salvation;  and  if  one  great  purpose  of 
sacramental  seals  is  to  "separate  between  the  precious  and 
the  vile,"  and  to  set  a  distinguishing  mark  upon  the  Lord's 
people ;  then,  undoubtedly,  those  who  bear  this  mark, 
whether  infant  or  adult,  ought  to  be  treated  with  appropri- 
ate inspection  and  care,  and  their  relation  to  the  Church 
of  God  never,  for  a  moment,  lost  sight  of  or  neglected. 
In  regard  to  adults,  this  duty  is  generally  recognized  by 
all  evangelical  churches.  Why  it  has  fallen  into  so  much 
neglect,  in  regard  to  our  infant  and  juvenile  members, 
maybe  more  easily  explained  than  justified.  And  yet  it  is 
manifest,  that  attention  to  the  duty  in  question  in  reference 
to  the  youthful  members  of  the  church,  is  not  only  impor- 
tant, but,  in  some  respects,  pre-eminently  so ;  and  pecu- 
liarly adapted  to  promote  the  edification  and  enlargement 
of  the  Christian  family. 

If  it  be  asked,  what  more  can  be  done  for  the  moral  cul- 
ture and  welfare  of  baptized  children,  than  is  done  ?  I  an- 


SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM.  63 

swer,  much,  that  would  be  of  inestimable  value  to  them, 
and  to  the  Christian  community.  The  task,  indeed,  of 
training  them  up  for  God,  is  an  arduous  one,  but  it  is  prac- 
ticable, and  the  faithful  discharge  of  it  involves  the  richest 
reward.  The  following  plan  may  be  said  naturally  to 
grow  out  of  the  doctrine  of  infant  membership ;  and  no  one 
can  doubt  that,  if  carried  into  faithful  execution,  it  would 
form  a  new  and  glorious  era  in  the  history  of  the  Church 
of  God. 

Let  all  baptized  children,  from  the  hour  of  their  receiv- 
ing the  seal  of  God's  covenant,  be  recorded  and  recognized 
as  infant  disciples.  Let  the  officers  of  the  church,  as  well 
as  their  parents  according  to  the  flesh,  ever  regard  them 
with  a  watchful  and  affectionate  eye.  Let  Christian  in- 
struction, Christian  restraint,  and  Christian  warning,  en- 
treaty and  prayer  ever  attend  them,  from  the  mother's  lap 
to  the  infant  school,  and  from  the  infant  school  to  the  semi- 
nary, whatever  it  may  be,  for  more  mature  instruction. 
Let  them  be  early  taught  to  reverence  and  read  the  Word 
of  God,  and  to  treasure  up  select  portions  of  it  in  their 
memories.  Let  appropriate  Catechisms,  and  other  sound 
compends  of  Christian  truth,  be  put  into  their  hands,  and 
by  incessant  repetition  and  inculcation  be  impressed  upon 
their  minds.  Let  a  school,  or  schools,  according  to  its 
extent,  be  established  in  each  church,  placed  under  the 
immediate  instruction  of  exemplary,  orthodox,  and  pious 
teachers,  carefully  superintended  by  the  pastor,  and  visited 
as  often  as  practicable  by  all  the  officers  of  the  church. 
Let  these  beloved  youth  be  often  reminded  of  the  relation 
which  they  bear  to  the  Christian  family;  and  the  just  claim 
of  Christ  to  their  affections  and  service,  be  often  presented 
with  distinctness,  solemnity,  and  affection.  Let  every 
kind  of  error  and  immorality  be  faithfully  reproved,  and  as 
far  as  possible  suppressed  in  them.  Let  the  pastor  con- 
vene the  baptized  children  as  often  as  practicable,  and 
address  them  with  instruction  and  exhortation  in  the  name 
of  that  God  to  whom  they  have  been  dedicated,  and  every 
endeavour  made  to  impress  their  consciences  and  their 
hearts  with  Gospel  truth.  When  they  come  to  years  of 
discretion,  let  them  be  affectionately  reminded  of  their  duty 
to  ratify,  by  their  own  act,  the  vows  made  by  their  parents 


64  SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM. 

in  baptism,  and  be  urged,  again  and  again,  to  give,  first 
their  hearts,  and  then  the  humble  acknowledgment  of  an 
outward  profession,  to  the  Saviour.  Let  this  plan  be  pur- 
sued faithfully,  constantly,  patiently,  and  with  parental 
tenderness.  If  instruction  and  exhortation  be  disregarded, 
and  a  course  of  error,  immorality,  or  negligence  be  in- 
dulged in,  let  warning,  admonition,  suspension,  or  excom- 
munication ensue,  according  to  the  character  of  the  indi- 
vidual, and  the  exigencies  of  the  case.  "What!"  some 
will  be  disposed  to  say,  "  suspend  or  excommunicate  a 
young  person,  who  has  never  yet  taken  his  seat  at  a 
sacramental  table,  nor  even  asked  for  that  privilege?" 
Certainly.  Why  not?  If  the  children  of  professing 
Christians  are  born  members  of  the  church,  and  are  bap- 
tized as  a  sign  and  seal  of  this  membership,  nothing  can 
be  plainer  than  that  they  ought  to  be  treated  in  every  res- 
pect as  church  members,  and,  of  course,  if  they  act  in  an 
unchristian  manner,  a  bar  ought  to  be  set  up  in  the  way 
of  their  enjoying  Christian  privileges.  If  this  be  not 
admitted,  we  must  give  up  the  very  first  principles  of 
ecclesiastical  order  and  duty.  Nor  is  there,  obviously, 
any  thing  more  incongruous  in  suspending  or  excluding 
from  church  privileges  a  young  man,  or  young  woman, 
who  has  been  baptized  in  infancy,  and  trained  up  in  the 
bosom  of  the  church,  but  has  now  no  regard  for  religion, 
than  there  is  in  suspending  or  excommunicating  one  who 
has  been,  for  many  years,  an  attendant  on  the  Lord's  table, 
but  has  now  forsaken  the  house  of  God,  and  has  no  longer 
any  desire  to  approach  a  Christian  ordinance.  No  one 
would  consider  it  as  either  incongruous  or  unreasonable  to 
declare  such  a  person  unworthy  of  Christian  fellowship, 
and  excluded  from  it,  though  he  had  no  disposition  to  enjoy 
it.  The  very  same  principle  applies  in  the  case  now  under 
consideration. 

It  has  been  supposed,  indeed,  by  some  Poedobaptists, 
that  although  every  baptized  child  is  a  regular  church 
member,  he  is  a  member  only  of  the  general  visible 
church,  and  not  in  the  ordinary  sense,  of  any  particular 
church;  and,  therefore,  that  he  is  not  amenable  to  ecclesi- 
astical discipline  until  he  formally  connects  himself  with 
some  particular  church.     This  doctrine  appears  to  me  sub- 


SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM.  65 

versive  of  every  principle  of  ecclesiastical  order.  Every 
baptized  child  is,  undoubtedly,  to  be  considered  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  church  in  which  he  received  baptism,  until  he 
dies,  is  excommunicated,  or  regularly  dismissed  to  another 
church.  And  if  the  time  shall  ever  come  when  all  our 
churches  shall  act  upon  this  plan ;  when  infant  members 
shall  be  watched  over  with  unceasing  and  affectionate 
moral  care ;  when  a  baptized  young  person,  of  either  sex, 
being  not  yet  what  is  called  a  communicant,  shall  be  made 
the  subject  of  mild  but  faithful  Christian  discipline,  if  he 
fall  into  heresy  or  immorality ;  when  he  shall  be  regularly 
dismissed,  by  letter,  from  the  watch  and  care  of  one  church 
to  another;  and  when  all  his  spiritual  interests  shall  be 
guarded,  by  the  church,  as  well  as  by  his  parents,  with 
sacred  and  affectionate  diligence ;  when  this  efHcient  and 
faithful  system  shall  be  acted  upon,  infant  baptism  will  be 
universally  acknowledged  as  a  blessing,  and  the  church 
will  shine  with  new  and  spiritual  glory. 

The  truth  is,  if  infant  baptism  were  properly  improved; 
if  the  profession  which  it  includes,  and  the  obligations 
which  it  imposes,  were  suitably  appreciated  and  followed 
up,  it  would  have  few  opponents.  I  can  no  more  doubt, 
if  this  were  done,  that  it  would  be  blessed  to  the  saving 
conversion  of  thousands  of  our  young  people,  than  I  can 
doubt  the  faithfulness  of  a  covenant  God.  Yes,  infant 
baptism  is  of  God,  but  the  fault  lies  in  the  conduct  of  its 
advocates.  The  inconsistency  of  its  friends,  has  done 
more  to  discredit  it,  than  all  the  arguments  of  its  opposers, 
a  hundred  fold.  Let  us  hope  that  these  friends  will,  one 
day,  arouse  from  their  deplorable  lethargy,  and  show  that 
they  are  contending  for  an  ordinance  as  precious  as  it  is 
scriptural. 

10.  Another  objection,  often  urged  with  confidence, 
against  infant  membership  and  baptism,  is,  that,  z/*  they  be 
well  founded,  then  it  follows,  of  course,  that  every  bap- 
tized young  person,  or  even  child,  ivho  feels  disposed  to 
do  so,  has  a  right  to  come  to  the  Lord's  table,  without 
inquiry  or  permission  of  any  one.  Upon  this  principle, 
say  our  Baptist  brethren,  as  a  large  portion  of  those  who 
are  baptized  in  infancy  are  manifesdy  not  pious,  and  many 
of  them  become  opendy  profligate  ;  if  their  caprice  or  their 


66  SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM. 

wickedness  should  prompt  them  to  go  forward,  the  church 
would  be  disgraced  by  crowds  of  the  most  unworthy  com- 
municants. 

This  objection  is  founded  on  an  entire  mistake.  And 
a  recurrence,  for  one  moment,  to  the  principles  of  civil 
society,  will  at  once  expose  it.  Every  child  is  a  citizen  of 
the  country  in  which  he  was  born;  a  plenary  citizen :  there 
is  no  such  thing  as  half-way  citizenship  in  this  case.  He 
is  a  free  born  citizen  in  the  fullest  extent  of  the  term. 
Yet,  until  he  reach  a  certain  age,  and  possess  certain  quali- 
fications, he  is  not  eligible  to  the  most  important  offices 
which  his  country  has  to  confer.  And  after  he  has  been 
elected,  he  cannot  take  his  seat  for  the  discharge  of  these 
official  functions,  until  he  has  taken  certain  prescribed 
oaths.  It  is  evident  that  the  State  has  a  right,  and  finds  it 
essential  to  her  well  being,  by  her  constitution  and  her 
laws,  thus  to  limit  the  rights  of  the  citizen.  Still  no  one 
supposes  that  he  is  the  less  a  citizen,  or  thinks  of  repre- 
senting him  as  only  a  half-way  citizen  prior  to  his  com- 
pliance with  these  forms.  In  like  manner  every  baptized 
child  is  a  member — a  plenary  member  of  the  church  in 
which  he  received  the  sacramental  seal.  There  his  mem- 
bership is  recognized  and  recorded,  and  there  alone  can 
he  regularly  receive  a  certificate  of  this  fact,  and  a  dismis- 
sion to  put  himself  under  the  watch  and  care  of  any  other 
church.  Still  the  church  to  which  this  ecclesiastical  minor 
belongs,  in  the  exercise  of  that  "authority  which  Christ 
has  given,  for  edification  and  not  for  destruction,"  will  not 
suffer  him,  if  she  does  her  duty,  to  come  to  the  Lord's 
table,  until  he  has  reached  an  age  when  he  has  "know- 
ledge to  discern  the  Lord's  body,"  and  until  he  shall  mani- 
fest that  exemplary  deportment  and  hopeful  piety  which 
become  one  who  claims  the  privileges  of  Christian  commu- 
nion. If  he  manifest  an  opposite  character,  it  is  lier  duty, 
as  a  part  of  her  stated  discipline,  to  prevent  his  enjoying 
these  privileges;  just  as  it  is  her  duty,  in  the  case  of  one 
who  has  been  a  communicant  for  years,  when  he  departs, 
from  the  order  and  purity  of  a  Christian  profession,  to 
debar  him  from  the  continued  enjoyment  of  his  former 
good  standing.  In  short,  the  language  of  the  apostle  Paul, 
though  originally  intended  for  a  diflferent  purpose,  is  strict-. 


SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM.  67 

iy  applicable  to  the  subject  before  us:  "The  heir,  as  long 
as  he  is  a  child,  differeth  nothing  from  a  servant,  though 
he  be  lord  of  all ;  but  is  under  tutors  and  governors,  until 
the  time  appointed  of  the  Father."  In  a  word,  in  the 
Church,  as  well  as  in  the  State,  there  is  an  order  in  which 
privileges  are  to  be  enjoyed.  As  it  is  not  every  citizen 
who  is  eligible  to  office ;  and  as  not  even  the  qualified  have 
a  right  to  intrude  into  office  uncalled ;  so  youthful  church 
members,  like  all  others,  are  under  the  watch  and  care  of 
the  church,  and  the  time  and  manner  in  which  they  shall 
recognize  their  baptismal  engagements,  and  come  to  the 
enjoyment  of  plenary  privileges,  Christ  has  left  his  church 
to  decide,  on  her  responsibility  to  himself.  No  one,  of 
any  age,  has  a  right  to  come  to  her  communion  without  the 
consent  of  the  church.  When  one,  after  coming  to  that 
communion,  has  been  debarred  from  it  for  a  time,  by  regu- 
lar ecclesiastical  authority,  he  has  no  right  to  come  again 
until  the  interdict  is  taken  off.  Of  course,  by  parity  of 
reasoning,  one  who  has  never  yet  come  at  all,  cannot  come 
without  asking  and  obtaining  the  permission  of  those  who 
are  set  to  govern  in  the  church. 

This  view  of  the  subject  is  at  once  illustrated  and  con- 
firmed by  the  uniform  practice  of  the  Old  Testament 
church.  The  children  of  Jewish  parents,  though  regular 
church  members  in  virtue  of  their  birth,  and  recognized  as 
such  in  virtue  of  their  circumcision,  were  still  not  allowed 
to  come  to  the  Passover  until  they  were  of  a  certain  age,  and 
not  even  then,  unless  they  were  ceremonially  clean.  This 
is  so  well  attested  by  sacred  antiquarians,  both  Jewish  and 
Christian,  that  it  cannot  be  reasonably  called  in  question. 
Calvin  remarks,  that  "the  Passover,  which  has  now  been 
succeeded  by  the  sacred  Supper,  did  not  admit  guests  of  all 
descriptions  promiscuously;  but  was  rightly  eaten  only  by 
those  who  were  of  sufficient  age  to  be  able  to  inquire  into 
its  signification."  The  same  distinct  statement  is  also 
made  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Gill,  an  eminent  commentator  of 
the  Baptist  denomination.  "According  to  the  maxims  of 
the  Jews,"  says  he,  "persons  were  not  obliged  to  the 
duties  of  the  law,  or  subject  to  the  penalties  of  it  in  case  of 
non-performance,  until  they  were,  a  female,  at  the  age  of 
twelve  years  and  one  day,  and  a  male  at  the  age  of  thirteea. 


68  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

years  and  one  day.  But  then  they  used  to  train  up  their 
children,  and  inure  them  to  religious  exercises  before. 
They  were  not  properly  under  the  law  until  they  were 
arrived  at  the  age  abovementioned;  nor  were  they  reckoned 
adult  church  members  until  then ;  nor  then  neither  unless 
worthy  persons:  for  so  it  is  said,  "  He  that  is  worthy,  at 
thirteen  years  of  age,  is  called"  a  "son  of  the  congregation 
of  Israel."* 

The  objection,  then,  before  us  is  of  no  force.  Or  ra- 
ther, the  fact  which  it  alleges  and  deprecates  has  no  exist- 
ence. It  makes  no  part  of  the  Poedobaptist  system.  Nay, 
our  system  has  advantages  in  respect  to  this  matter,  great 
and  radical  advantages,  which  belong  to  no  other.  While 
it  regards  baptized  children  as  members  of  the  church,  and 
solemnly  binds  the  church,  as  well  as  the  parents,  to  see 
that  they  be  faithfully  trained  up  "in  the  nurture  and  ad- 
monition of  the  Lord,"  it  recognizes  the  church  as  possess- 
ing, and  as  bound  to  exercise,  the  power  of  guarding  her 
communion  table  from  all  the  profane  approaches,  even  of 
her  own  children,  and  so  regulating  their  Christian  culture, 
and  their  personal  recognition  of  Christian  duty,  as  shall 
best  serve  the  great  purpose  of  building  up  the  church  as 
"  an  habitation  of  God  through  the  Spirit." 

II.  The  last  objection  which  I  propose  to  consider  is 
this  :  "  If  baptism,"  say  our  opponents,  "  takes  the  place 
of  circumcision,  and  if  the  church  is  the  same  in  substance 
now  as  when  circumcision  was  the  initiating  seal,  then 
why  is  not  baptism  as  universal  in  the  New  Testament 
churchy  as  circumcision  was  under  the  old  economy? 
Why  is  not  every  child,  under  the  light  of  the  Gospel, 
baptized,  as  every  Israelitish  child  was  circumcised."  I 
answer,  this,  undoubtedly,  ought  to  he  the  case.  That  is, 
all  parents,  where  the  Gospel  comes,  ought  to  be  true  be- 
lievers ;  ought  to  be  members  of  the  Church  of  Christ 
themselves ;  and  ought  to  dedicate  their  children  to  God 
in  holy  baptism.  The  command  of  God  calls  for  it ;  and 
if  parents  were  what  they  ought  to  be,  they  would  be  all 
prepared  for  a  proper  application  of  this  sacramental  seal. 
Under  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  a  single  nation  of  the  great 

*  Commentary  on  Luke  ii.  42. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  OH 

human  family,  was  called  out  of  an  idolatrous  world  to  be 
the  depository  of  the  word  and  the  ordinances  of  the  true 
God.  Then  all  who  belonged  to  that  nation  were  bound 
to  be  holy;  and  unless  they  were  at  least  ceremonially 
clean,  the  divine  direction  was,  that  they  should  be  "  cut 
off  from  their  people."  The  obligation  was  universal,  and 
the  penalty,  in  case  of  delinquency,  was  universal.  Mul- 
titudes of  parents,  no  doubt,  under  that  economy,  pre- 
sented their  children  to  God  in  the  sacrament  of  circum- 
cision, who  had  no  true  faith ;  but  they  professed  to  be- 
lieve ;  they  attended  to  all  the  requisitions  of  ceremonial 
cleanness,  and  that  rendered  the  circumcision  authorized 
and  regular.  So  in  the  New  Testament  church.  This  is 
a  body,  like  the  other,  called  out  from  the  rest  of  mankind, 
but  not  confined  to  a  particular  nation.  It  consists  of  all 
those,  of  every  nation,  who  profess  the  true  religion. 
Within  this  spiritual  community,  baptism  ought  to  be  as 
universal  as  circumcision  was  in  the  old  "  commonwealth 
of  Israel."  Those  parents  who  profess  faith  in  Christ, 
and  obedience  to  him,  and  those  only,  ought  to  pressnt 
their  children  in  baptism.  There  is,  indeed,  reason  to  fear 
that  many  visible  adult  members  are  not  sincere.  Still,  as 
they  are  externally  regular,  their  children  are  entitled  to 
baptism.  And  were  the  whole  infant  population  of  our 
land  in  these  circumstances,  they  might,  and  ought  to  be 
baptized. 

I  have  thus  endeavoured  to  dispose  of  the  various  objec- 
tions which  our  Baptist  brethren  are  wont  to  urge  against 
the  cause  of  infant  baptism.  I  have  conscientiously  aimed 
to  present  them  in  all  their  force ;  and  am  constrained  to 
believe  that  neither  Scripture,  reason,  nor  ecclesiastical 
history  afford  them  the  least  countenance.  The  longer  I 
reflect  on  the  subject,  the  deeper  is  my  conviction,  that 
the  membership  and  the  baptism  of  infants  rest  on  grounds 
which  no  fair  argument  can  shake  or  weaken. 

From  the  principles  implied  or  established  in  the  fore- 
going pages,  we  may  deduce  the  following  practical  con- 
clusions : 

1.  We  are  warranted  in  returning  with  renewed  confi- 
dence to  the  conclusion  stated  in  advance,  in  the  early  part 
of  our  first  discourse,  viz :  that  the  error  of  our  Baptist 


70  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

brethren  in  rejecting  the  church  membership  and  the  bap- 
tism of  infants,  is  a  most  serious  and  mischievous  error. 
It  is  not  a  mere  mistake  about  a  speculative  point ;  but  is 
an  error  which  so  directly  contravenes  the  spirit  of  the 
whole  Bible,  and  of  all  Jehovah's  covenants  with  his  peo- 
ple, in  every  age,  that  it  must  be  considered  as  invading 
some  of  the  most  vital  interests  of  the  body  of  Christ,  and 
as  adapted  to  exert  a  most  baneful  influence  on  his  spiri- 
tual kingdom.  On  this  subject,  my  friends,  my  expres- 
sions are  strong,  because  my  convictions  are  strong,  and 
my  desire  to  guard  every  hearer  against  mischievous  error 
increasingly  strong.  I  am,  indeed,  by  no-  means  disposed 
to  deny  either  the  piety  or  the  honest  convictions  of  our 
respected  Baptist  brethren  in  adopting  an  opposite  opinion 
from  ours.  But  I  am,  nevertheless,  deeply  convinced  that 
their  system  is  not  only  entirely  unscriptural,  but  also  that 
its  native  tendency  is  to  place  children,  who  are  the  hope 
of  the  church,  in  a  situation  less  friendly  to  the  welfare  of 
Zion,  and  less  favourable,  by  far,  to  their  own  salvation, 
tuau  that  in  which  they  are  placed  by  our  system ;  and 
that  its  ultimate  influence  on  the  rising  generation,  on  fa- 
mily religion,  and  on  the  growth  of  the  church,  must  be 
deeply  injurious. 

2.  Again;  it  is  evident,  from  what  has  been  said,  that 
the  baptism  of  our  children  means  much,  and  involves 
much  solemn  tender  obligation.  We  do  not,  indeed,  as- 
cribe to  this  sacrament  that  kind  of  inherent  virtue  of 
which  some  who  bear  the  Christian  name  have  spoken  and 
inferred  so  much.  We  do  not  believe  that  baptism  is  rege- 
neration.* We  consider  this  as  a  doctrine  having  no 
foundation  in  the  Word  of  God,  and  as  eminently  fitted  to 
deceive  and  destroy  the  soul.  We  do  not  suppose  that 
the  ordinance,  whenever  legitimately  administered,  is  ne- 
cessarily accompanied  with  any  physical  or  moral  influ- 
ence, operating  either  on  the  soul  or  the  body  of  him  who 
receives  it.  Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  we  do  not  consider  it 
as  a  mere  unmeaning  ceremony.  We  cannot  regard  it  as 
the  mere  giving  a  name  to  the  child  to  whom  it  is  dis- 
pensed.    Multitudes  appear  to  regard  it  as  amounting  to 

*  See  Additional  Notes. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  71 

little,  if  any  more  than  one  or  both  of  these.  And,  there- 
fore, they  consider  the  season  of  its  celebration  as  a  kind 
of  ecclesiastical  festival  or  pageant.  They  would  not,  on 
any  account,  have  the  baptism  of  their  children  neglected ; 
and  yet  they  solicit  and  receive  it  for  their  offspring,  with 
scarcely  one  serious  or  appropriate  thought ;  without  any 
enlightened  or  adequate  impression  of  what  it  means,  or 
what  obligation  it  imposes  on  them  or  their  children.  A  bap- 
tism, like  a  marriage,  is  regarded  by  multitudes  as  an  appro- 
priate season  for  congratulation  and  feasting,  and  very  little 
more,  in  connexion  with  it,  seems  to  occur  to  their  minds. 
This  is  deeply  to  be  deplored.  The  minds  of  the  mass  of 
mankind  seem  to  be  ever  prone  to  vibrate  from  superstition 
to  impiety,  and  from  impiety  back  to  superstition.  Those 
simple,  spiritual  views  of  truth,  and  of  Christian  ordinances 
which  the  Bible  every  where  holds  forth,  and  which  alone 
tend  to  real  benefit,  too  seldom  enlighten  and  govern  the 
mass  of  those  who  bear  the  Christian  name.  Now,  the 
truth  is,  little  as  it  is  recollected  and  laid  to  heart,  few 
things  can  be  more  expressive,  more  solemn,  or  more  in- 
teresting, more  touching  in  its  appeals,  more  deeply  com- 
prehensive in  its  import,  or  more  weighty  in  the  obliga- 
tions which  it  involves,  than  the  baptism  of  an  infant.  I 
repeat  it — and  oh,  that  the  sentence  could  be  made  to  thrill 
through  every  parent's  heart  in  Christendom — the  bap- 
tism of  a  child  is  one  of  the  solemn  transactions  pertain- 
ing to  our  holy  religion.  A  human  being,  just  opening 
its  eyes  on  the  world ;  presented  to  that  God  who  made 
it ;  devoted  to  that  Saviour  without  an  interest  in  whose 
atoning  blood,  it  had  better  never  have  been  born;  and 
consecrated  to  that  Holy  Spirit,  who  alone  can  sanctify 
and  prepare  it  for  heaven ;  is  indeed  a  spectacle  adapted 
to  affect  every  pious  heart.  In  death,  our  race  is  run; 
worldly  hope  and  expectation  are  alike  extinct ;  and  the 
destiny  of  the  immortal  spirit  is  forever  fixed.  But  the 
child  presented  for  baptism,  if  it  reach  the  ordinary  limit 
of  human  life,  has  before  it  many  a  trial ;  and  will  need  all 
the  pardoning  mercy,  all  the  sanctifying  grace,  and  all  the 
precious  consolations  which  the  blessed  Gospel  of  Christ 
has  to  bestow.  And  even  if  it  die  in  infancy,  it  still 
needs  the  pardoning  mercy  and  sanctifying  grace  which 


72 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 


are  set  forth  in  this  ordinance.  On  either  supposition,  the 
transaction  is  important.  A  course  is  commenced  which 
will  be  a  blessing  or  a  curse  beyond  the  power  of  the  hu- 
man mind  to  estimate.  And  the  eternal  happiness  or 
misery  of  the  young  immortal  will  depend,  under  God, 
upon  the  training  it  shall  receive  from  the  hands  of  those 
who  offer  it. 

Let  those,  then,  who  bring  their  children  to  the  sacred 
font  to  be  baptized,  ponder  well  what  this  ordinance 
means,  and  what  its  reception  involves,  both  in  regard  to 
parents  and  children.  Let  them  remember  that  in  tak- 
ing this  step,  we  make  a  solemn  profession  of  be- 
lief, that  our  children,  as  well  as  ourselves,  are  born  in 
sin,  and  stand  in  indispensable  need  of  pardoning  mercy 
and  sanctifying  grace.  We  formally  dedicate  them  to 
God,  that  they  may  be  "  washed  and  justified,  and  sanc- 
tified in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  by  the  Spirit  of 
our  God."  And  we  take  upon  ourselves  solemn  vows  to 
train  them  up  in  the  knowledge  and  fear  of  God;  to  in- 
struct them,  from  the  earliest  dawn  of  reason,  in  the  prin- 
ciples and  duties  of  our  holy  religion;  to  consider  and 
treat  them  as  ingrafted  members  of  the  family  of  Christ; 
and  to  do  all  in  our  power,  by  precept  and  example,  by 
authority  and  by  prayer,  to  lead  them  in  the  ways  of  truth, 
of  holiness,  and  of  salvation.  Is  this  an  ordinance  to  be 
engaged  in  as  a  mere  ceremony,  or  with  convivial  levity? 
Surely  if  there  be  a  transaction,  among  all  the  duties  in- 
cumbent on  us  as  Christians — if  there  be  a  transaction 
which  ought  to  be  engaged  in  with  reverence,  and  godly 
fear;  with  penitence,  faith,  and  love;  with  bowels  of 
Christian  compassion  yearning  over  our  beloved  offspring; 
with  humble  and  importunate  aspirations  to  the  God  of  all 
grace  for  his  blessing  on  them  and  ourselves;  and  with 
solemn  resolutions,  in  the  strength  of  his  grace,  that  we 
will  be  faithful  to  our  vows, — this  is  that  transaction  I  O 
how  full  of  meaning !  And  yet  how  little  thought  of  by 
the  most  of  those  who  engage  in  it  with  external  deco- 
rum! 

3.  The  foregoing  discussion  will  show  by  whom  chil- 
dren ought  to  be  presented  in  holy  baptism.  The  an- 
swer given  by  the  old  Waldenses  to  this  question  is,  un- 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  73 

doubtedly,  the  wisest  and  best.  They  say,  as  before 
quoted,  *'  Children  ought  to  be  presented  in  baptism  by 
those  to  whom  they  are  most  nearly  related,  such  as  their 
parents,  or  those  whom  God  hath  inspired  with  such  a 
charity."  If  parents  be  living,  and  be  of  a  suitable  char- 
acter; that  is,  if  they  have  been  baptized  themselves,  and 
sustain  a  regular  standing  as  professing  Christians,  they, 
and  they  alone,  ought  to  present  their  children  in  this  ordi- 
nance. And  all  introduction  of  godfathers  and  godmothers, 
as  sponsors,  either  instead  of  the  parents,  or  besides  the 
parents,  is  regarded  by  the  great  majority  of  Pcedobaptist 
churches,  as  superstitious,  unwarranted,  an(^.,  of  coiirse, 
mischievous  in  its  tendency.  Whatever  tends  to  beget 
erroneous  ideas  of  the  nature  and  design  of  a  Gospel  ordi- 
nance ;  to  ^hift  off  the  responsibility  attending  it  from  the 
proper  to  improper  hands ;  and  to  the  assumption  of 
solemn  engagements  by  those  who  can  never  really  fulfil 
them,  and  have  no  intention  of  doing  it,  cannot  fail  of  ex- 
erting an  influence  unfriendly  to  the  best  interests  of  the 
church  of  God. 

But  if  the  parents  be  dead ;  or,  though  living,  of  irre- 
ligious character;  and  if  the  grand-parents,  or  any  other 
near  relations,  of  suitable  qualifications,  be  willing  to  un- 
dertake the  office  of  training  up  children  "  in  the  nurture 
and  admonition  of  the  Lord,"  it  is  proper  for  them  to  pre- 
sent such  children  in  baptism.  Or  if  deserted,  or  orphan 
children  be  cast  in  the  families  of  strangers,  who  are  no 
way  related  to  them  according  to  the  flesh,  but  who  are 
willing  to  stand  in  the  place  of  parents,  and  train  them  up 
for  God;  even  these  strangers,  in  short,  any  and  every 
person,  of  suitable  character,  who  may  be  willing  to  as- 
sume the  charitable  office  of  giving  them  a  Christian  edu- 
cation, may  and  ought  to  present  such  children  for  Chris- 
tian baptism.  Not  only  the  offspring  of  Abraham's  body, 
but  "  all  that  were  born  in  his  house,  and  all  that  were 
bought  with  his  money,"  were  commanded  to  be  circum- 
cised. Surely  no  Christian,  who  has  a  child,  white  or 
black,  placed  in  his  family,  and  likely  to  be  a  permanent 
member  of  it,  can  doubt  that  it  is  his  duty  to  give  it  a 
faithful  Christian  education.  And  as  one  great  object  of 
infant  baptism  is  to  secure  this  point,  he  will  not  hesitate 

G 


74  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

to  offer  it  up  to  God  in  that  ordinance  which  he  has  ap- 
pointed, provided  no  valid  objection  in  regard  to  the 
wishes  of  the  parents  of  such  a  child  interpose  to  pre- 
vent it. 

4.  This  subject  shows  how  responsible,  and  how  so- 
lemn is  the  situation  of  those  young  persons  ivho  have 
been  in  their  infancy  dedicated  to  God  in  holy  baptism! 
This  is  a  point  concerning  which  both  old  and  young  are 
too  often  forgetful.  It  is  generally  conceded,  and  exten- 
sively felt,  that  parents,  by  dedicating  their  children  to 
God  in  this  ordinance,  are  brought  under  very  weighty 
obligations,  which  cannot  be  forgotten  by  them,  without 
incurring  great  guilt.  But  young  people  seldom  lay  to 
heart  as  they  ought,  that  their  early  reception  of  the  seal 
of  God's  covenant,  in  consequence  of  the  act  of  their  pa- 
rents, places  them  in  circumstances  of  the  most  solemn 
and  responsible  kind.  They  are  too  apt  to  imagine  that 
they  are  not  members  of  the  church,  until  by  some  act  of 
profession  of  their  own,  they  are  brought  into  this  relation, 
and  assume  its  bonds ;  that  their  making  this  profession, 
or  not  making  it,  is  a  matter  of  mere  choice,  left  to  their 
own  decision ;  that  by  omitting  it,  they  violate  no  tie — 
contract  no  guilt;  that  by  refraining,  they  leave  them- 
selves more  at  liberty ;  and  that  the  only  danger  consists 
in  making  an  insincere  profession.  This  is  a  view  of  the 
subject,  which,  however  common,  is  totally,  and  most 
criminally  erroneous.  The  children  of  professing  Chris- 
tians are  already  in  the  church.  They  were  born  mem- 
bers. Their  baptism  did  not  make  them  members.  It 
was  a  public  ratification  and  recognition  of  their  member- 
ship. They  were  baptized  because  they  were  members. 
They  received  the  seal  of  the  covenant  because  they  were 
already  in  covenant  by  virtue  of  their  birth.  This 
blessed  privilege  is  their  "birth-right."  Of  course,  the 
only  question  they  can  ask  themselves  is,  not — shall  we 
enter  the  church,  and  profess  to  be  connected  with  Christ's 
family  ?  But — shall  we  continue  in  it,  or  act  the  part  of 
ungrateful  deserters?  "Shall  we  be  thankful  for  this 
privilege,  and  gratefully  recognize  and  confirm  it  by  our 
own  act;  or  shall  we  renounce  our  baptism;  disown  and 
deny  the  Saviour  in  whose  name  we  have  been  enrolled 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  T5 

as  members  of  his  family;  and  become  open  apostates 
from  that  family?"  This  is  the  real  question  to  be  de- 
cided ;  and  truly  a  solemn  question  it  is !  Baptized  young 
people !  think  of  this.  You  have  been  in  the  bosom  of 
the  church  ever  since  you  drew  your  jfirst  breath.  The 
seal  of  God's  covenant  has  been  placed  upon  you.  You 
cannot,  if  you  would,  escape  from  the  responsibility  of 
this  relation.  You  may  forget  it ;  you  may  hate  to  think  of 
it;  you  may  despise  it;  but  still  the  obligation  lies  upon 
you;  you  cannot  throw  it  off.  Your  situation  is  solemn 
beyond  expression.  On  the  one  hand,  to  go  forward,  and 
to  recognize  your  obligation  by  a  personal  profession, 
without  any  love  to  the  Saviour,  is  to  insult  him  by  a 
heartless  offering;  and,  on  the  other,  to  renounce  your  al- 
legiance by  refusing  to  acknowledge  him,  by  turning  your 
backs  on  his  ordinances,  and  by  indulging  in  that  course 
of  life  by  which  his  religion  is  dishonoured,  is  certainly, 
whether  you  realize  it  or  not,  to  "  deny  him  before  men," 
and  to  incur  the  fearful  guilt  of  apostacy;  of  "drawing 
back  unto  perdition." 

"According  to  this  representation,"  I  shall  be  told,  "the 
condition  of  many  of  our  youth  is  very  deplorable.  It  is 
their  duty,  you  say,  to  profess  the  name  of  Christ,  and  to 
seal  their  profession  at  a  sacramental  table.  This  they 
cannot  do ;  for  they  are  conscious  that  they  do  not  possess 
those  principles  and  dispositions  which  are  requisite  to 
render  such  a  profession  honest.  What  course  shall  they 
steer?  If  they  do  not  profess  Christ,  they  live  in  rebel- 
lion against  God :  if  they  do,  they  mock  him  with  a  lie. 
Which  side  of  the  alternative  shall  they  embrace  ?  Con- 
tinue among  the  profane,  and  be  consistently  wicked? 
Or  withdraw  from  them  in  appearance,  and  play  the  hypo- 
crite?" 

The  case  is,  indeed,  very  deplorable.  Destruction  is 
on  either  hand.  For  "  the  unbelieving  shall  have  their 
part  in  the  lake  of  fire;  (Rev.  xxi.  6.)  and  the  hope  of. the 
hypocrite  shall  perish:"  (Job  viii.  13.)  God  forbid  that 
we  should  encourage  either  a  false  profession,  or  a  refusal 
to  make  one.  The  duty  is  to  embrace  neither  side  of  the 
alternative.  Not  to  continue  with  the  profane,  and  not  to 
act  the  hypocrite ;  but  to  receive  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in 


76  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

truth,  and  to  walk  in  him.  " I  cannot  do  it,"  replies  one: 
and  one,  it  may  be,  not  without  moments  of  serious  and 
tender  emotions  upon  this  very  point:  "I  cannot  do  it.'* 
My  soul  bleeds  for  thee,  my  unhappy !  But  it  must  be 
done,  or  thou  art  lost  forever.  Yet  what  is  the  amount 
of  that  expression — in  the  month  of  some  a  flaunting  ex- 
cuse, and  of  others,  a  bitter  complaint — I  cannot?  Is  the 
inability  to  believe  in  Christ  different  from  an  inability  to 
perform  any  other  duty  ?  Is  there  any  harder  necessity  of 
calling  the  God  of  truth  a  liar;  in  not  believing  the  record 
which  he  hath  given  of  his  Son,  than  of  committing  any 
other  sin?  The  inability  created,  the  necessity  imposed, 
by  the  enmity  of  the  carnal  mind  against  God?  (Rom. 
viii.  7.)  It  is  the  inability  of  wickedness,  and  of  nothing 
else.  Instead  of  being  an  apology,,  it  is  itself  the  essen- 
tial crime,  and  can  never  become  its  own  vindication. 

But  it  is  even  so.  The  evil  does  lie  too  deep  for  the 
reach  of  human  remedies.  Yet  a  remedy  there  is,  and  an 
effectual  one.  It  is  here — "  I  will  sprinkle  clean  water 
upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean;  from  all  your  filthiness 
and  from  all  your  idols  will  I  cleanse  you.  A  new  heart 
also  will  I  give  you,  and  a  new  spirit  will  I  put  within 
you ;  and  I  will  take  away  the  stony  heart  out  of  your 
flesh ;  and  I  will  give  you  an  heart  of  flesh.  And  I  will 
put  my  spirit  within  you>  and  cause  you  to  walk  in  my 
statutes ;  and  ye  shall  keep  my  judgments  and  do  them. 
(Ezek.  xxxvi.  ^5-27.)  Try  this  experiment.  Go  with 
thy  "  filthiness,"  and  thine  "  idols;"  go  with  thy  "  stony 
heart,"  and  thy  perverse  spirit,  which  are  thy  real  ina- 
bility, to  God  upon  the  throne  of  grace ;  spread  out  before 
him  his  "exceeding  great  and  precious  promises;  impor- 
tune him  as  the  hearer  of  prayer,  in  the  name  of  Jesus,  for 
the  accomplishment  of  it  to  thyself.  Wait  for  his  mercy, 
it  is  worth  waiting  for,  and  remember  his  word — There- 
fore will  the  Lord  wait,  that  he  may  be  gracious  unto  you ; 
and  therefore  will  he  be  exalted,  that  he  may  have  mercy 
upon  you:  for  the  Lord  is  a  God  of  judgment;  blessed  are 
all  they  that  wait  for  him.* 

*  The  two  preceding  paragraphs?  are  from  the  powerful  and  elo- 
quent pen  of  the  late  Rev.  J.  M  Mason,  D.  D.  See  Christian's  Maga- 
zine, Vol.  II.  p.  414-416. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  7? 

5.  Finally ;  from  the  foregoing  principles  and  considera- 
tions, it  is  evident,  that  the  great  body  of  Foedobaptist 
churches  have  much  to  reform  in  regard  to  their  treat- 
ment of  baptized  children^  and  are  bound  to  address 
themselves  to  that  reform  with  all  speed  and  fidelity.  It 
has  been  already  observed,  that  one  great  end  for  which 
the  church  of  God  was  instituted,  was  to  train  up,  from 
age  to  age,  a  seed  to  serve  God,  and  to  be  faithful  wit- 
nesses in  behalf  of  the  truth  and  order  of  his  family,  in 
the  midst  of  an  unbelieving  world.  If  this  be  so,  then, 
surely  the  church,  in  her  ecclesiastical  capacity,  is  bound 
carefully  to  watch  over  the  education,  and  especially,  the 
religious  education  of  her  youthful  members ;  nor  is  there 
any  risk  in  asserting,  that  just  in  proportion  as  she  has 
been  faithful  to  this  part  of  her  trust,  she  has  flourished  in 
orthodoxy,  piety,  and  peace ;  and  that  when  she  has  neg- 
lected it,  her  children  have  grown  up  in  ignorance,  and 
too  often  in  profligacy,  and  wandered  from  her  fold  into 
every  form  of  error.  If  the  church  wishes  her  baptized 
youth  to  be  a  comfort  and  a  strength  to  their  moral  mo- 
ther ;  if  she  wishes  them  to  adhere  with  intelligence,  and 
with  dutiful  affection  to  her  distinctive  testimony ;  and  to 
be  a  generation  to  the  praise  of  Zion's  King,  when  their 
fathers  shall  have  gone  to  their  final  account ;  then  let  her, 
by  all  means,  watch  over  the  training  of  her  young  people 
with  peculiar  diligence  and  fidelity ;  and  consider  a  very 
large  part  of  her  duty,  as  a  church,  as  consisting  in  con- 
stant and  faithful  attention  to  the  moral  and  religious  cul- 
ture of  the  rising  generation. 

What  is  the  reason  that  so  many  of  the  baptized  youth, 
in  almost  all  our  Poedobaptist  churches,  grow  up  in  ignor- 
ance and  disregard  of  the  religion  of  their  parents  ?  Why 
are  so  many  of  them,  when  they  come  to  judge  and  act 
for  themselves,  found  embracing  systems  of  gross  error,  if 
not  total  infidelity,  and  wandering,  in  too  many  instances, 
into  the  paths  of  degrading  profligacy  I  It  is  not  enough 
to  say,  that  our  children  are  by  nature  depraved,  and 
prone  to  the  ways  of  error  and  folly.  This  is,  doubtless, 
true ;  but  it  is  not  the  whole  truth.  It  cannot  be  ques- 
tioned, that  much  of  the  reason  lies  at  the  door  of  the 
church  herself,  as  well  as  of  the  parents  of  such  youth. 


79  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

The  church  has  too  often  forgotten  that  baptism  is  as  really 
a  seal  to  the  church,  as  it  is  to  the  pai-ents  and  the  chil- 
dren who  receive  it.  And,  therefore,  while  in  many  in- 
stances, a  superstitious  regard  has  been  paid  to  the  mere 
rite  of  baptism,,  a  most  deplorable  neglect  of  the  duties 
arising  from  it  has  been  indulged,  even  by  some  of  our 
most  evangelical  churches.  Parents,  while  most  vigilantly 
attentive  to  the  literary,  scientific,  and  ornamental  educa- 
tion of  their  children,  have  slighted,  to  a  most  humiliating 
degree,  their  moral  and  religious  training.  They  have 
sent  them  to  schools  conducted  by  immoral,  heretical,  or 
infidel  teachers,  who,  of  course,  paid  no  ^regard  to  that 
part  of  their  education  which  is  unspeakably  the  most  im- 
portant of  all ;  or  who  rather  might  be  expected  to  exert 
in  this  respect,  a  most  pestiferous  influence.  And,  after 
this  cruel  treatment  of  their  offspring,  have  appeared  to 
be  utterly  surprised  when  they  turned  out  profligates ! 
What  other  result  could  have  been  expected? 

While  it  is  granted  that  the  primary  movements  in  the 
great  work  of  Christian  education,  are  to  be  expected  from 
the  parents; — indeed,  if  the  work  be  not  begun  on'the  mo- 
ther's lap,  a  most  important  period  has  been  suflered  to 
pass  unimproved  ; — yet  the  church  has  a  duty  to  perform 
in  this  matter  which  is  seldom  realized.  It  is  hers,  by 
her  pastor  and  eldership,  to  stimulate  and  guide  parents  in 
this  arduous  and  momentous  labour ;  to  see  that  proper 
schools  for  her  baptized  youth  are  formed  or  selected ;  to 
put  the  Bible,  and  suitable  Catechisms,  and  other  com- 
pends  of  religious  truth  into  their  hands ;  to  convene  them 
at  stated  intervals  for  instruction,  exhortation,  and  prayer; 
to  remind  them  from  time  to  time,  with  parental  tender- 
ness, of  their  duty  to  confess  Christ,  and  recognize  their 
relation  to  his  church,  by  their  own  personal  act ;  and,  if 
they  fall  into  gross  error,  or  open  immorality,  or  continue 
to  neglect  religion,  to  exercise  toward  them,  with  pa- 
rental affection,  and  yet  with  firmness,  that  discipline 
whicli  Christ  has  appointed  expressly  for  the  benefit  of 
all  the  members,  and  especially  of  the  youthful  members 
of  his  covenanted  family.  If  this  plan  were  faithfully 
pursued  with  our  baptized  youth,  I  am  constrained  to  con- 
pur  with  the  pious  Mr.  Baxter  in  believing,  that  in  niae^ 


SERMON?)  ON  BAPTISM.  79 

teen  cases  out  of  twenty,  our  children,  consecrated  to 
God  in  their  infancy,  would  grow  up  dutiful,  sober,  or- 
derly, and  serious,  and  before  they  reached  mature  age, 
recognize  their  membership  by  a  personal  act,  with  sin- 
cerity and  to  edification.  Happy  era!  When  shall  the 
church  of  God  be  blessed  with  such  fidelity,  and  with 
such  results  ? 


SERMON  III. 


THE  MODE  OF  ADMINISTERING  BAPTISM. 

Can  any  man  forbid  water,  that  these  should  not  be  baptized  ? — 
Acts  X.  47. 

Having  endeavoured,  in  the  preceding  discourses,  to 
show  that  the  baptism  of  infants  is  a  scriptural  and  reason- 
able service,  I  now  proceed  to  inquire  into  the  mode  in 
which  this  ordinance  ought  to  be  administered. 

And  here,  it  is  well  known,  that  there  is  a  very  serious 
diversity  of  opinion.  On  the  one  hand,  our  Baptist  brethren 
believe  that  there  is  no  true  baptism  unless  the  whole  body 
be  plunged  under  water.  While  on  the  other  hand,  we, 
and  a  very  great  majority  of  the  Christian  world,  maintain 
that  the  mode  of  baptism  by  sprinkling  or  affusion  is  a 
method  just  as  valid  and  lawful  as  any  other.  It  will  be 
my  object,  in  the  present  discourse,  to  support  the  latter 
opinion;  or  rather  to  maintain,  from  Scripture,  and  from  the 
best  usage  of  the  Christian  church,  that  baptism  by  sprink- 
ling or  affusion  not  only  rests  on  as  good  authority  as 
immersion ;  but  that  it  is  a  method  decisively  more  scrip- 
tural, suitable,  and  edifying. 

From  the  very  nature  of  this  subject  it  will  require  some 
little  extent  of  discussion  to  place  it  in  a  proper  light,  and 
some  closeness  of  attention  to  apprehend  and  follow  the 
arguments  which  may  be  employed.  Let  me  then  request 
from  you  a  candid  and  patient  hearing.  If  I  know  my  own 
heart,  it  is  my  purpose  to  exhibit  the  subject  in  the  light 
of  truth ;  and  to  advance  nothing  but  that  which  appears  to 
rest  on  the  authority  of  Him  who  instituted  the  ordinance 
under  consideration,  and  who  is  alone  competent  to  declare 
liis  will  concerning  it.     And,. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  81 

1.  Let  us  attend  to  the  real  meaning  of  the  orighial 
word  tvhich  is  employed  in  the  New  Testament  to  express 
this  sacramental  rite. 

The  Greek  word  fSartft^u,  which  we  translate  baptize, 
from  the  circumstance  of  its  having  been  so  constantly  and 
so  long  the  subject  of  earnest  discussion;  and  from  its  near 
resemblance  to  the  English  word  which  we  employ  to 
render  it,  (or,  we  might  rather  say,  its  identity  with  that 
word)  has  become  so  familiar  with  the  public  mind,  that  it 
may  almost  be  regarded  as  a  naturalized  term  of  our  lan- 
guage. 

Now,  we  contend,  that  this  word  does  not  necessarily, 
nor  even  commonly,  signify  to  immerse ;  but  also  implies 
to  wash,  to  sprinkle,  to  pour  on  water,  and  to  tinge  or 
dye  with  any  liquid ;  and,  therefore,  accords  very  well  with 
the  mode  of  baptism  by  sprinkling  or  affusion. 

I  am  aware,  indeed,  that  our  Baptist  brethren,  as  before 
intimated,  believe,  and  confidently  assert,  that  the  only 
legitimate  and  authorized  meaning  of  this  word,  is  to  im- 
merse ;  and  that  it  is  never  employed,  in  a  single  case,  in 
any  part  of  the  Bible,  to  express  the  application  of  water 
in  any  other  manner.  I  can  venture,  my  friends,  to  assure 
you,  with  the  utmost  confidence,  that  this  representation  is 
wholly  incorrect.  I  can  assure  you,  that  the  word  which 
we  render  baptize,  does  legitimately  signify  the  application 
of  water  in  any  way,  as  well  as  by  immersion.  Nay,  I 
can  assure  you,  if  the  most  mature  and  competent  Greek 
scholars  that  ever  lived  may  be  allowed  to  decide  in  this 
case,  that  many  examples  of  the  use  of  this  word  occur  in 
Scripture,  in  which  it  not  only  may,  but  manifestly  must 
signify  sprinkling,  perfusion,  or  washing  in  any  way. 
Without  entering  into  the  minute  details  of  Greek  criticism 
in  reference  to  this  term,  which  would  be  neither  suitable 
to  our  purpose,  nor  consistent  with  our  limits ;  it  will  suf- 
fice to  refer  to  a  few  of  those  passages  of  Scripture  which 
will  at  once  illustrate  and  confirm  the  position  which  I  have 
laid  down. 

Thus,  when  the  Evangelists  tell  us  that  the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees  invariably  "  washed  (in  the  original,  baptized) 
their  hands  before  dinner;'*  when  we  are  told  that,  when 
they  come  in  from  the  market,  "  except  they  wash,  (in  the 


82  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

original,  'except  they  baptize')  they  eat  not;"  when  we 
read  of  the  Pharisees  being  so  scrupulous  about  the  "  wash- 
ing (in  the  original,  the  '  baptizing')  of  cups,  and  pots,  and 
brazen  vessels,  and  tables;"  when  our  Saviour  speaks  of 
his  disciples  being  "baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  in 
manifest  allusion  to  the  pouring  out  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost;  when  John  the  Baptist  predicted, 
that  they  should  be  "  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
with  fire,"  in  reference  to  the  Holy  Ghost  sitting  upon 
each  of  them  as  with  "  cloven  tongues  of  fire"  on  the  same 
day :  when  we  find  the  apostle  representing  the  children  of 
Israel  as  all  baptized  by  a  cloud  passing  over  without 
touching  them ;  and  also  as  baptized  in  the  Red  Sea,  when 
we  know  that  none  of  them  were  immersed  in  passing 
through,  or,  at  most,  only  sprinkled  by  the  spray  of  the 
watery  walls  on  each  side ;  for  we  are  expressly  told  that 
they  went  through  '•''dry  shocW''  when  Judas,  in  celebrating 
the  Paschal  supper  with  his  Master,  in  dipping  a  morsel  of 
bread  on  a  bunch  of  herbs  in  the  "  sop"  in  the  dish,  is  said^ 
by  Christ  himself,  to  "  baptize  his  hand  in  the  dish,"  (as- 
it  is  in  the  original,  Matt.  xxvi.  23.)  which  no  one  can 
imagine  implies  the  immersion  of  his  whole  hand  in  the 
gravy  of  which  they  were  all  partaking ;  I  say,  when  the 
word  *'  baptize"  is  used  in  these  and  similar  senses,  it 
surely  cannot  mean  in  any  of  these  cases  to  immerse  or 
plunge.  If  a  man  is  said  by  the  inspired  Evangelist  to 
be  baptized,  when  his  hands  only  are  washed;  and  if 
"  tables"  (or  couches,  on  which  they  reclined  at  meals,  as 
appears  from  the  original)  are  spoken  of  as  "baptized," 
when  the  cleansing  of  water  Avas  applied  to  them  in  any 
manner,  and  when  the  complete  immersion  of  them  in 
water  is  out  of  the  question ;  surely  nothing  can  be  plainer 
than  that  the  Holy  Spirit  who  endited  the  Scriptures,  does 
not  restrict  the  meaning  of  this  Avord  to  the  idea  of  plung- 
ing, or  total  immersion. 

Again;  the  New  Testament  meaning  of  this  term  appears 
from  the  manner  in  which  it  is  applied  to  the  ablutions  of 
the  ceremonial  economy.  The  apostle,  in  writing  to  the 
Hebrews,  and  speaking  of  the  Jewish  ritual,  says,  "It 
stood  only  in  meats  and  drinks  and  divers  washings,"  (in 
the  original,  "divers  baptisms.")     Now  we  know  that  b-y 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  83 

far  the  greater  part  of  these  "  divers  washiiigs"  were  accom- 
plished by  sprinkling  and  affusion,  and  not  by  immersion. 
The  blood  of  the  Paschal  Lamb  was  directed  to  be 
**  sprinkled"  on  the  door-posts  of  the  Israelites,  as  a  token 
of  Jehovah's  favovn*,  and  of  protection  from  death.  When 
they  entered  into  covenant  with  God  at  Sinai,  their  solemn 
vows  were  directed  to  be  sealed  by  a  similar  sign.  After 
Moses  had  spoken  every  precept  to  all  the  people  according 
to  the  law,  and  they  had  given  their  consent,  and  promised 
to  obey ;  he  took  the  blood  of  the  sacrifice,  and  water,  and 
"sprinkled"  both  the  book  and  the  people,  (Heb.  ix.  19.) 
On  the  great  day  of  atonement,  when  the  High  Priest  went 
into  the  most  Holy  Place,  he  ''sprinkled"  the  blood  of  the 
sacrifice  on  the  Mercy  Seat,  as  a  token  of  propitiation  and 
cleansing.  When  any  individual  was  to  be  cleansed,  and 
delivered  from  legal  guilt,  the  blood  of  the  sacrifice  was  to 
be  "  sprinkled"  upon  him  seven  times.  In  like  manner  at 
other  times,  the  consecrated  oil  was  to  be  sprinkled  upofi 
him  who  applied  for  deliverance  from  pollution. 

Thus  the  people  were  to  be  ceremonially  delivered  from 
their  uncleanness.*  When  Aaron  and  his  sons  were  set 
apart  to  their  office,  they  were  sprinkled  with  blood,  as  a 
sign  of  purification.  When  tents  or  dwelling  houses  were 
to  be  cleansed  from  pollution,  it  was  done,  among  other 
things,  by  sprinkling  them  with  water.  When  the  vessels, 
used  in  domestic  economy,  were  to  be  ceremonially 
cleansed,  the  object  was  effected  in  the  same  manner,  by 
sprinkling  them  with  water.t  In  a  few  cases,  and  but  a 
few,  the  mode  of  cleansing  by  plunging  into  water  is  pre- 
scribed. Now,  these  are  the  "  divers  baptisms"  of  which 
the  apostle  speaks.  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  they  are 
divers,  (6ta9opotj. )  If  they  had  been  of  one  kind — immer- 
sion only — this  term  could  not  with  propriety  have  been 
used.  But  they  were  of  diflferent  kinds — some  sprinkling, 
others  pouring,  some  scouring  and  rinsing,  (see  Leviticus 
vi.  28.)  and  some  plunging;  but  all  pronounced  by  the 
inspired  apostle  to  be  baptism. 

*  See  Exodus,  xxix.  40 ;  Leviticus,  i.  3,  4,  5.  8,  9. 14  and  ]5  chap- 
ters;  Numbers,  19th  chapter,  and  Deuteronomy,  12th  and  15th  chap- 
ters. 

t  See  Numbers,  xix.  17 — ^22. 


84  SER3I0NS  ON  BAPTISM. 

But,  happily,  the  inspired  apostle  does  not  leave  us  in 
doubt  what  those  "divers  baptisms"  were,  of  which  he 
speaks.  He  singles  out  and  presents  sprinkling  as  his 
chosen  and  only  specimen.  "For,  (says  he,  in  the  13th 
19th  and  21st  verses  of  the  same  chapter,  explaining  what 
he  means  by  '  divers  baptisms,')  if  the  blood  of  bulls, 
and  of  goats,  and  the  ashes  of  an  heifer,  sj)rinkling  the  un- 
clean, sanctifieth  to  the  purifying  of  the  flesh;  how  much 
more  shall  the  blood  of  Christ,  &c.  For  when  Moses  liad 
spoken  every  precept  to  all  the  people,  according  to  the 
law,  he  took  the  blood  of  calves  and  of  goats,  with  water, 
and  scarlet  wool,  and  hyssop,  and  sprinkled  both  the  book 
and  all  the  people.  Moreover,  he  sprinkled  likewise  with 
blood  both  the  tabernacle,  and  all  the  vessels  of  the  minis- 
try." If  the  apostle  understood  his  own  meaning,  then,  it  is 
manifest  that  in  speaking  of  "  divers  baptisms,"  he  had  a 
principal  reference  to  the  application  of  blood  and  of  water 
by  sprinkling. 

In  short,  it  is  perfectly  manifest,  to  ever}'-  one  competent 
to  judge  in  the  case,  that  the  Greek  words  which  we  trans- 
late baptize  and  baptism,  do  undoubtedly  signify,  in  a  num- 
ber of  cases,  in  both  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  the 
washing  Avith  water,  or  the  application  of  water  in  any 
way.  To  immerse,  is,  undoubtedly,  one  of  the  senses 
which  may  be  applied  to  the  words.  But  it  is  so  far  from 
being  the  universal,  the  necessary  meaning,  as  our  Baptist 
brethren  assert,  that  it  is  not  even  the  common  meaning. 
And  I  am  well  persuaded  that  the  venerable  Dr.  Owen, 
certainly  one  of  the  greatest  and  best  men  of  the  day  in 
which  he  lived,  is  borne  out  by  truth  when  he  pronounces, 
"  That  no  one  instance  can  be  given  in  Scripture,  in  which 
the  word  which  we  render  baptize,  does  necessarily  signify 
either  to  dip  or  plunge."  In  every  case  the  word  admits 
of  a  diflferent  sense ;  and  it  is  really  imposing  on  public 
credulity  to  insist  that  it  always  does,  and  necessarily  must 
signify  immersion.* 

*  See  this  point  set  in  a  clear  and  strong-  light  by  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Woods,  in  his  "  Lectures  on  Infant  Baptism ;"  by  the  Rev.  Professor 
Stuart,  in  the  "Bibhcal  Repository,"  No.  10;  by  the  Rev.  Professor 
Pond,  of  Maine,  in  his  "Treatise  on  Christian  Baptism;"  in  the 
♦'  Biblical  Repertory,"  Vol.  III.  p.  475,  &-c.  &c. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTIS»I.  85 

In  like  manner,  if  we  examine  the  senses  manifestly- 
attached  to  jSarttoi  and  jSartT't^tu,  by  the  best  Greek  classical 
writers,  as  shown  by  the  ablest  lexicographers  and  critics, 
the  same  result  will  be  established ;  in  other  words,  it  will 
appear  that  these  words  are  used,  and  often  used,  to  express 
the  ideas  of  cleansing,  pouring,  washing,  wetting,  and 
tinging,  or  dyeing,  as  well  as  immersion:  and,  of  course, 
that  no  certain  evidence  in  favour  of  the  doctrine  of  our 
Baptist  brethren,  can  be  derived  from  this  source.  Indeed, 
a  late  eminent  anti-poedobaptist  writer,  while  he  strenu- 
ously maintains  that  /BaTtft^co,  always  signifies  to  immerse, 
acknowledges  that  he  has  "  all  the  lexicographers  and 
commentators  against  him  in  that  opinion."*  How  far  the 
confidence  which,  in  the  face  of  this  acknowledgment,  he 
expresses,  that  they  are  all  wrongs  and  that  his  interpreta- 
tion alone  is  right,  is  either  modest  or  well-founded,  must 
be  left  to  the  impartial  reader. 

It  is  evident,  then,  that  our  Baptist  brethren  can  gain 
nothing  by  an  appeal  to  the  original  word  employed  in  the 
New  Testament  to  express  this  ordinance.  It  decides 
nothing.  All  impartial  judges — by  which  I  mean  all  the 
most  profound  and  mature  Greek  scholars,  who  are  neither 
theologians  nor  sectarians— agree  in  pronouncing,  that  the 
term  in  question  imports  the  application  of  water  by 
sprinkling,  pouring,  tinging,  wetting,  or  in  any  other  way, 
as  well  as  by  plunging  the  whole  body  under  it. 

2.  There  is  nothing  in  the  thing  signified  by  baptism 
which  renders  immersion  m,ore  necessary  or  proper  than 
any  other  mode  of  applying  loater  in  this  ordinance. 

Our  Baptist  brethren  suppose  and  insist  that  there  is 
something  in  the  emblematical  meaning  of  baptism,  which 
renders  dipping  or  plunging  the  only  proper  mode  of 
administering  the  ordinance.  And  hence  nothing  is  more 
common,  among  the  brethren  of  that  denomination,  than  to 
pour  ridicule  on  all  other  modes  of  baptizing,  as  entirely 
deficient  in  meaning  and  expressiveness.  I  am  persuaded, 
my  friends,  that  the  slightest  examination  of  the  subject 
will  convince  every  impartial  inquirer  that  there  is  no  solid 
ground  for  this  representation. 

*  Carson  on  Baptism,  p.  79. 
H 


86  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

It  is  granted,  on  all  hands,  that  the  thing  principally  sig- 
nified by  baptism,  is  the  renovation  and  sanctification  ol"  the 
heart,  by  the  cleansing  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
This  was,  undoubtedly,  the  blessing  of  which  circumcision 
was  an  emblem.  It  signified,  as  the  inspired  apostle  tells 
us,  "  the  putting  off"  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh."* 
"  He  is  not  a  Jew,"  says  the  same  apostle,  "  who  is  one 
outwardly ;  neither  is  that  circumcision  which  is  outward 
in  the  flesh ;  but  he  is  a  Jew  which  is  one  inwardly ;  and 
circumcision  is  that  of  the  heart,  in  the  Spirit,  and  not  in 
the  letter. "t  In  like  manner,  baptism  signifies  the  reno- 
vation of  the  heart  by  the  special  operation  of  the  Spirit  of 
God.  It  is  intended  ever  to  keep  us  in  mind,  by  a  very 
significant  and  striking  emblem,  that  we  are  all  by  nature 
polluted  and  guilty,  and  that  we  stand  in  need  of  the 
pardoning  and  purifying  grace  of  God  by  a  crucified  Re- 
deemer. 

Now,  when  the  inspired  writers  speak  of  imparting  the 
influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  children  of  men,  by 
what  kind  of  figure  is  that  blessing  commonly  expressed? 
I  answer — as  every  one  who  is  familiar  with  the  Bible  will 
concur  in  answering — much  more  frequently  by  sprinkling 
and  pouring  out,  than  by  any  other  form  of  expression. 
Thus  the  prophet  Isaiah  speaks  again  and  again  of  the 
spirit  being  poured  out  upon  the  people  from  on  high.J 
Take  a  single  specimen — I  will  pour  water  upon  him  that 
is  thirsty,  and  floods  upon  the  dry  ground ;  I  will  pour  my 
spirit  upon  thy  seed,  and  my  blessing  upon  thine  oflspring. 
The  prophets,  Ezekiel,  Joel,  and  Zechariah,  repeatedly 
employ  the  same  language  ;§  and  this  form  of  expression 
is  also  found  more  than  once  in  the  New  Testament. || 
Indeed  it  seems  to  be  the  favourite  language  of  the  Spirit  of 
God  when  speaking  on  this  subject.  In  other  places  the 
term  sprinkling  is  employed  to  express  the  same  idea. 
Accordingly,  Jehovah  says,  by  the  prophet  Ezekiel,  'I 
will  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean : 

*  Colossians,  ii.  11. 
t  Romans,  ii.  28,  29. 

I  Isaiah,  xxxii.  15  ;  xliv.  3. 

§  Ezekiel,  xxxix.29.     Joel,  ii.  28,  29.    Zechariah,  xii.  10. 

II  Acts,  ii.  17, 18;  x.  45. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  87 

from  all  your  filthiness,  and  from  all  your  idols  will  I 
cleanse  you.  A  new  heart  also  will  I  give  you,  and  a  new 
spirit  will  I  put  within  you ;  and  I  will  take  away  the  stony 
heart  out  of  your  flesh,  and  I  will  give  you  an  heart  of 
flesh.*  And,  in  like  manner,  the  prophet  Isaiah,  when 
speaking  of  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  and  the  benefits 
accruing  to  the  church  in  New  Testament  times,  foretels — 
"So  shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations."!  Again,  this  divine 
sanctifying  influence  in  its  application  to  men,  is  represent- 
ed by  the  Psalmist,  and  by  the  prophet  Hosea,  under  the 
similitude  of  rain,  which  we  know  descends  in  drops, 
sprinkling  the  earth,  and  its  verdant  furniture. :j:  "  He  shall 
come  down  like  rain  upon  the  mown  grass ;  as  showers 
that  water  the  earth." 

But  to  come  still  nearer  to  the  point  in  hand.  We  have 
not  only  seen  that  whenever  the  inspired  writers  wish  to 
express  the  idea  of  the  Holy  Spirit  being  imparted  to  men, 
either  to  sanctify  their  hearts,  or  to  furnish  them  with  mi- 
raculous powers,  the  figure  of  "pouring  out"  is,  in  almost 
all  cases,  adopted,  and  that  of  immersion  never ;  but,  fur- 
ther, when  they  use  the  specific  term  which  expresses  the 
ordinance  before  us;  when  they  speak  of  the  "baptism 
of  the  Spirit,"  how  do  they  explain  it  ?  Hear  the  expla- 
nation by  the  Master  himself.  The  Saviour,  after  his 
resurrection,  told  his  disciples,  that  "  John  truly  baptized 
with  water,  but  they  should  be  baptized  with  the  Holy 
Ghost"  not  many  days  from  that  time,  (Acts  i.  4,  5.)  and 
directing  them  to  remain  in  Jerusalem  until  this  promise 
should  be  fulfilled  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  And  how  did 
the  Holy  Spirit  baptize  the  people  then?  By  immersion?' 
Not  at  all;  but  by  being  "poured  out."  Accordingly,  the 
apostle  Peter,  in  giving  an  account  to  his  brethren  of  what 
occured  in  the  house  of  Cornelius,  declares:  "And  as  I 
began  to  speak,  the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  them,,  as  on  us  at 
the  beginning,  (that  is  at  the  beginning  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment economy,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.)  Then  remem- 
bered I  the  words  of  the  Lord,  ho\A-  he  said,  John,  indeed 
baptized  with  water;  but  ye  shall  be  baptized  with  the 

»  Ezekiel,  xxxvi.  25,  26.  t  Ezek.  lii.  15. 

t  Psalm,  Ixxii.  6.     Hosea,  vi.  3. 


88  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

Holy  Ghost."  (Acts  xi.  15,  16.)  The  baptism  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  then,  consisted  in  the  pouring  out^  or  effu- 
sion of  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  was  the  baptism  predicted 
by  the  prophets.  This  was  the  baptism  which  our  Lord 
himself  promised.  And  this  was  the  baptism  realized  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost.  I  ask,  again,  was  this  immersion? 
Yet  it  was  baptism.  And  here^  we  may  add,  is  an  indubi- 
table example  of  the  word  baptism  being  used  in  a  sense 
which  cannot  possibly  imply  immersion. 

Surely  it  is  not  without  design  or  meaning,  that  we  find 
language  of  this  kind  so  generally,  I  might  almost  say,  so 
uniformly  used.  Can  a  single  instance  be  produced  from 
the  Word  of  God  in  which  the  cleansing  influences  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  are  symbolized  by  dipping  or  plunging  into 
water,  or  into  oil  or  blood  ?  Or  can  a  single  example  be 
found  in  which  believers  are  represented  as  being  dipped 
or  plunged  into  the  Holy  Ghost  ?  No  such  example  is 
recollected.  Whenever  the  inspired  writers  speak  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  being  imparted  to  the  children  of  men,  either 
in  his  sanctifying  power,  or  his  miraculous  gifts,  they 
never  represent  the  benefit  under  the  figure  of  immersion; 
but  always,  unless  my  memory  deceives  me,  by  the  figures 
of  "sprinkling,"  "pouring  out,"  "falling,"  or  "resting 
upon"  from  on  high.  Now,  if  baptism,  so  far  as  it  has  a 
symbolical  meaning,  is  intended  to  represent  the  cleansing 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  all  agree ;  it  is  evident  that  no  mode 
of  applying  the  baptismal  water  can  be  more  strikingly 
adapted  to  convey  its  symbolical  meaning,  or  more  strongly 
expressive  of  the  great  benefit  which  the  ordinance  is  in- 
tended to  hold  forth  and  seal,  than  sprinkling  or  pouring. 
Nay,  is  it  not  manifest  that  this  mode  of  administering  the 
ordinance,  is  far  tnore  in  accordance  with  Bible  language, 
and  Bible  allusion,  than  any  other?  Surely,  then,  bap- 
tism by  sprinkling  or  affusion,  would  have  been  treated 
with  less  scorn  by  our  Baptist  brethren,  if  they  had  recol- 
lected that  these  are,  invariably,  the  favourite  figures  of 
the  inspired  writers  when  they  speak  of  the  richest  cove- 
nant blessings  which  the  Spirit  of  God  imparts  to  his  be* 
loved  people.  Surely  all  attempts  to  turn  this  mode  of  ap- 
plying the  sacramental  water  in  baptism  into  ridicule,  is 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  89 

really  nothing  less  than  shameless  ridicule  of  the  state- 
ments and  the  language  of  God's  own  word ! 

3.  The  circumstances  attending  the  several  cases  of 
baptism,  recorded  in  the  New  Testament,  render  it  highly 
probable,  not  to  say  morally  certain,  that  the  immersioti 
of  the  whole  body  could  not  have  been  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism then  commonly  adopted. 

The  baptism  of  the  three  thousand  converts  made  by 
the  instrumentality  of  Peter's  preaching,  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost,  is  the  first  remarkable  instance  of  Christian 
baptism  which  occurs  in  the  New  Testament  history. 
Christ  had  promised,  before  he  left  his  disciples,  that  he 
would  send  to  them  his  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  favourite  ex- 
pression by  which  he  was  accustomed  to  designate  this 
gift,  was  that  he  would  pour  out  the  Holy  Spirit  upon 
them.  Accordingly,  in  ten  days  after  his  ascension  to 
heaven,  he  was  pleased,  in  a  most  extraordinary  manner, 
to  fulfil  his  promise.  The  spirit  was  poured  out  with  a 
power  unknown  before.  And,  what  is  remarkable,  the 
apostle  Peter  assures  the  assembled  multitude,  that  what 
they  then  witnessed  was  a  fulfilment  of  the  prediction  by 
the  prophet  Joel,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  should  be  imparted 
in  a  manner  prefigured  by  the  term  pouring  out,  or  affu- 
sion. Three  thousand  were  converted  under  the  over- 
whelming impression  of  divine  truth,  dispensed  in  a  single 
sermon;  and  were  all  baptized,  and  "added  to  the 
church"  in  a  single  day.  From  the  short  account  given 
of  this  wonderful  transaction,  we  gather,  that  the  multitude 
on  whom  this  impression  was  made,  was  convened  in  some 
part  of  the  temple.  They  seem  to  have  come  together 
about  the  third  hour  of  the  day,  that  is,  nine  o'clock  in 
the  morning,  according  to  the  Jewish  mode  of  computing 
time.  At  least,  when  Peter  rose  to  commence  his  sermon,, 
that  was  the  hour.  Besides  the  discourse  of  which  we 
have  a  sketch  in  the  chapter  containing  the  account,  we  are 
told  he  exhorted  and  testified  with  many  other  words.  All 
these  services,  together  with  receiving  the  confession  of 
three  thousand  converts,  must  unavoidably  have  consumed 
several  hours ;  leaving  only  four  or  five  hours,  at  the  ut- 
most, for  baptizing  the  whole  number.  But  they  were 
all  baptized  that  same  day.     We  read  nothing,  however^ 


90  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

of  the  apostles  taking  the  converts  away  from  "  Solomon's 
Porch,"  or  wherever  else  they  were  assembled,  to  any 
river  or  stream  for  the  sake  of  baptizing  them.  Indeed,  at 
that  season  of  the  year,  there  was  no  river  or  brook  in  the 
immediate  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem,  which  would  ad- 
mit of  immersing  a  human  being.  Besides,  is  it  likely 
that  this  great  multitude,  most  of  whom  were  probably 
strangers  in  Jerusalem,  could  have  been  furnished  with 
such  a  change  of  raiment  as  health  and  decorum  required  ^ 
or  that  they  could  have  been  baptized  without  clothing 
altogether;  or  remained  on  the  ground,  through  the  public 
exercises,  in  their  wet  clothes?  Surely  all  these  supposi- 
tions  are  so  utterly  improbable  that  they  may  be  confi-- 
dently  rejected  But,  above  all,  was  it  physically  possible,, 
supposing  all  the  apostles  to  have  officiated  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  this  ordinance,  for  twelve  men  to  have  immersed 
three  thousand  persons  in  four  or  five  hours ;  which  we 
have  seen  must  have  been  the  case,  if,  as  is  evident,  the 
preaching,  the  examination  of  candidates,  and  the  baptiz- 
ing of  the  whole  number  took  place  after  nine'  o'clock  in 
the  forenoon?  Those  who  have  witnessed  a  series  of 
baptisms  by  immersion  know  how  arduous  and  exhausting 
is  the  bodily  effort  which  it  requires.  To  immerse  a  sin- 
gle person,  with  due  decorum  and  solemnity,  will  un- 
doubtedly require  from  five  to  six  minutes.  Of  course,  to 
immerse  one  hundred,  would  consume,  at  this  rate,  be- 
tween nine  and  ten  hours.  Now,  even  if  so  much  time 
could  possibly  be  assigned  to  this  part  of  the  work,  on  the 
same  day,  which  is  plainly  inadmissible,  can  we  suppose 
that  the  twelve  apostles  stood,  for  nine  or  ten  hours,  them- 
selves, in  the  water,  constantly  engaged  in  a  series  of  ef- 
forts among  the  most  severe  and  exhausting  to  human 
strength  that  can  well  be  undertaken?*     To  imagine  this, 

*  "  A  gentleman  of  veracity  told  the  writer,  that  he  was  once  pre- 
sent when  forty-seven  were  dipped  in  one  day,  in  tlie  usual  way. 
The  first  operator  began,  and  went  through  the  ceremony,  until  he 
had  dipped  twenty-Jive  persons;  when  he  was  so  fatigued,  that  he 
was  compelled  to  give  it  up  to  the  other,  who  with  g'-eat  apparent 
difficulty  dipped  the  other  twenty-two.  Both  appeared  completely 
exhausted,  and  went  off  the  ground  into  a  house  hard  by,  to  change 
their  clothes  and  refresh  themselves."  Scripture  Directory  for  Bap- 
tism by  a  Layman^  14. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  91 

would  be  among  the  most  improbable,  not  to  say  extrava- 
gant imaginations  that  could  be  formed  on  such  a  subject. 
Yet  even  this  supposition,  unreasonable  as  it  is,  falls  far 
short  of  providmg  for  even  one  half  of  the  requisite  num- 
ber. The  man,  therefore,  who  can  believe  that  the  three 
thousand  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  were  baptized  by  im- 
mersion, must  have  great  faith,  and  a  wonderful  facility  in 
accommodating  his  belief  to  his  wishes. 

With  regard  to  the  baptism  of  John,  many  of  the  same 
remarks  are  entirely  applicable.     Our  Baptist  brethren  uni- 
versally take   for  granted  that  John's  baptism   was   per- 
formed by  immersion ;  and  on  the  ground  of  that  assump- 
tion, they  speak  with  great  confidence  of  their  mode  of 
baptism  as  the  only  lawful  mode.     Now,  even  if  it  were 
certain  that  the  forerunner  of  Christ  had  always  baptized 
by  immersion,  still  it  would  be  little  to  the  purpose,  since 
it  is  plain  that  John's  baptism  was  not  Christian  baptism. 
Had  this  been  the  case,   then,  it  is  evident,  that  a  large 
part  of  the  population  of  "  Jerusalem  and  Judea,   and  of 
the  region  round  about  Jordan,"   would  have  been  profes- 
sing Christians.     But   was   it  so?     Every  reader  of  the 
New  Testament  history  knows  it  was  not;  that,   on   the 
contrary,  it  is  apparent  from  the  whole  narrative,  that  a 
great  majority  of  those  whom  John  baptized,  continued  to 
stand   aloof  from   the    Saviour.     But   what  decides   this 
point,  beyond  the  possibility  of   appeal  or  cavil,   is  the 
statement  in   the   nineteenth   chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  where  we  are  told  that  some  who  had  received 
John's  baptism,  were  afterwards  baptized  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord  Jesus.     Some  opponents  of  this  conclusion  have 
suggested   that   in    the  narrative    given  of    this   transac- 
tion, (Acts  xix.  1-6.)  we  are  to  consider  the  5th   verse, 
not  as   the  language  of  the  inspired  historian,    but  as    a 
continuation  of  Paul's  discourse,  as  recorded  in  the  4th 
verse.     Professor  Stuart,  in  his  remarks  on  the  ''  Mode  of 
Baptism,"  in  the  "  Biblical  Repository,"  (No.  X.  386.)  has 
shown  conclusively  that  this  gloss  is  wh(>lly  inadmissible ; 
and  even  leads  to  the  most  evident  absurdity.     But  there 
is  no  evidence,  and  I  M^ill  venture  to  say,  no  probability, 
that  John  ever  baptized  by  immersion.     The  evangelists 
informs  us  thai  he  baptized  great  multitudes.     It  appears. 


92  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

as  before  suggested,  that  "all  Jerusalem,  and  all  Judea, 
and  the  region  round  about  Jordan,''  flocked  to  his  minis- 
try, and  "  were  baptized  of  him  in  Jordan,  confessing 
their  sins."  Some  have  supposed  that  he  baptized  two 
millions  of  people.  But  suppose  the  number  to  be  one- 
twentieth  part  of  this  computation.  The  smallest  estimate 
that  we  can  consider  as  answering  the  description  of  the 
inspired  historians  is,  that  he  baptized  one  hundred  thou- 
sand individuals.  And  this,  in  about  one  year  and  a  half. 
That  is,  he  must  have  immersed  nearly  two  hundred, 
upon  an  average,  every  day,  dnting  the  whole  of  the 
period  in  question.  Now,  I  ask,  is  it  possible  for  human 
strength,  day  after  day,  for  more  than  five  hundred  days 
together,  to  undergo  such  labour  ?  It  cannot  be  imagined. 
The  thing  is  not  merely  improbable ;  it  is  impossible. 
To  accomplish  so  much,  it  would  have  been  necessary 
that  the  zealous  Baptist  should  spend  the  whole  of  every 
day  standing  in  the  water,  for  a  year  and  a  half,  and  even 
this  would  have  failed  altogether  of  being  sufficient.  I  say 
again,  with  confidence,  it  is  impossible. 

But  that  John  baptized  by  immersion  is  utterly  incredi- 
ble on  another  account.  Can  we  imagine  that  so  great  a 
multitude  could  have  been  provided  on  the  spot  with  con- 
venient changes  of  raiment  to  admit  of  their  being  plunged 
consistently  with  their  health  ?  Or  can  we  suppose  that 
the  greater  part  of  their  number,  Avould  remain  for  hours 
on  the  ground  in  their  wet  clothes  ?  And  if  not,  would  de- 
cency have  permitted  multitudes  of  both  sexes  to  appear, 
and  to  undergo  the  administration  of  the  ordinance  in  that 
mode,  in  a  state  of  entire  nakedness?  Surely  we  need 
not  wait  for  an  answer.    Neither  supposition  is  admissible. 

Nor  is  this  reasoning  at  all  invalidated  by  the  statement 
of  one  of  the  evangelists,  that  John  "  baptized  at  Enon, 
near  Salem,  because  there  was  much  water  tliere;'*  or,  as 
it  is  in  the  original,  *'  because  there  were  many  waters 
there.  For,  independently  of  immersion  altogether,  plen- 
tiful streams  of  water  were  absolutely  necessary  for  the 
constant  refreshment  and  sustenance  of  the  many  thou- 
sands who  were  encamped  from  day  to  day,  to  witness  the 
preaching  and  the  baptism  of  this  extraordinary  man; 
together  with  the  beasts  employed  for  their  transportation. 


SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM.  93 

Only  figure  to  yourselves  a  large  encampment  of  men, 
women,  and  children,  consisting  almost  continually  of 
many  thousand  souls,  continuing  together  for  a  number  of 
days  in  succession ;  constantly  coming  and  going ;  and  all 
this  in  a  warm  climate,  where  springs  and  wells  of  water 
were  comparatively  rare  and  precious  ;  only  figure  to  your- 
selves such  an  assemblage,  and  such  a  scene,  and  you  will 
be  at  no  loss  to  perceive  why  it  was  judged  important  to 
convene  them  near  the  banks  of  abundant  streams  of  water. 
Had  not  this  been  done,  they  must,  in  a  few  hours,  have 
either  quitted  the  ground,  or  suffered  real  distress. 

It  is  evident,  then,  that  often  and  confidently  as  the  bap- 
tism of  John  has  been  cited  as  conclusive,  in  favour  of  im- 
mersion, it  cannot  be  considered  as  afibrding  the  least  solid 
ground  for  such  a  conclusion.  There  is  not  the  smallest 
probability  that  he  ever  baptized  an  individual  in  this  man- 
ner. As  a  poor  man,  who  lived  in  the  wilderness ;  whose 
raiment  was  of  the  meanest  kind ;  and  whose  food  was 
such  alone  as  the  desert  afforded ;  it  is  not  to  be  supposed 
that  he  possessed  appropriate  vessels  for  administering 
baptism  to  multitudes  by  pouring  or  sprinkling.  He, 
therefore,  seems  to  have  made  use  of  the  neighbouring 
stream  of  water  for  this  purpose,  descending  its  banks,  and 
setting  his  feet  on  its  margin,  so  as  to  admit  of  his  using  a 
handful,  to  answer  the  symbolical  purpose  intended  by  the 
application  of  water  in  baptism. 

The  circumstances  attending  the  baptism  of  our  blessed 
Saviour  by  John,  have  been  often  adduced  by  our  Baptist 
brethren  as  strongly  favouring  the  practice  of  immersion ; 
but  when  they  are  examined,  they  will  be  found  to  afford 
no  real  aid  to  that  cause.  In  our  common  translation, 
indeed,  the  Evangelist  Matthew  tells  us,  (ch.  iii.  16.)  That 
Jesus,  when  he  was  baptized,  went  up  straightway  out  of 
the  water,  &c. ;  and  the  Evangelist  Mark  tells  us,  (ch.  i. 
9,  10.)  That  Jesus  was  baptized  of  John  in  Jordan ;  and 
straightway,  coming  up  out  of  the  water,  he  saw  the 
heavens  opened,  &c.  This  is  considered  by  many  super- 
ficial readers  as  decisive  in  establishing  the  fact  that  .im- 
mersion must  have  been  used  on  that  occasion ;  but  the 
moment  we  look  into  the  original,  it  becomes  evident  that 
the  language  of  both  the  Evangelists  imports  only  that 


94  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

Jesus,  after  he  was  baptized,  went  up  from  the  water,  that 
is,  ascended  the  banks  from  the  river.  Nothing  more  is, 
unquestionably,  imported  by  the  terms  used ;  and  this  leaves 
the  mode  of  administering  the  ordinance  altogether  unde- 
cided. Laying  aside  his  sandals,  he  might  only  have 
stepped  a  few  inches  into  the  river,  or  he  might  have  gone 
merely  to  the  water's  edge,  without  stepping  into  it  at  all.* 

The  baptism  of  Paul,  by  Ananias,  is  another  of  the 
scriptural  examples  of  the  administration  of  the  ordinance 
in  question,  which  yet  affords  not  the  smallest  hint  or  pre- 
sumption in  favour  of  immersion  ;  but  rather  the  contrary. 

We  are  told  that  Paul,  the  infuriated  persecutor,  while 
"  breathing  out  threatenings  and  slaughter  against  the 
disciples  of  the  Lord,"  was  met  on  his  way  to  Damascus, 
and  by  the  mighty  power  of  the  Saviour  whom  he  perse- 
cuted, was  stricken  down,  and  fell  prostrate  and  blind  to 
the  ground.  In  this  feeble  state  he  was  lifted  up,  and  "led 
by  the  hand,  and  carried  into  Damascus ;  and  he  was  there 
three  days  Avithout  sight,  and  did  neither  eat  nor  drink." 
In  these  circumstances,  Ananias,  a  servant  of  God,  is  di- 
rected to  go  to  him,  and  teach  him  what  to  do.  "And 
Ananias,"  we  are  told,  "  went  his  way,  and  entered  into  the 
house;  and  putting  his  hands  on  him,  said,  Brother  Saul, 
the  Lord,  even  Jesus,  that  appeared  unto  thee  in  the  way, 
as  thou  camest,  hath  sent  me,  that  thou  mightest  receive 
thy  sight,  and  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  now, 
why  tarriest  thou  ?  Arise,  and  be  baptized,  and  wash  away 
thy  sins,  calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord.  And  immedi- 
ately there  fell  from  his  eyes  as  it  had  been  scales ;  and  he 
received  sight  forthwith,  and  arose,  and  was  baptized. 
And  when  he  had  received  meat  he  was  strengthened."! 

The  attentive  reader  will,  no  doubt,  take  notice  that  in 
this  narrative  there  is  not  a  single  turn  of  expression  which 
looks  like  baptizing  by  immersion.  There  is  no  hint  that 
Paul  changed  his  raiment ;  or  that  he  and  Ananias  went 
out  of  the  house  to  a  neighbouring  pond  or  stream.  On 
the  contrary,  every  part  of  the  statement  wears  a  different 

*  See  a  very  luminous  and  satisfactory  view  of  the  record  of  this 
baptism,  by  Professor  Stuart,  of  Andover,  in  the  Biblical  Repository, 
No.  X.  p.  319,  320. 

t  Acts,  ix.  and  xxii.  compared. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  95 

aspect.  Paul,  when  Ananias  went  to  him,  was  evidently 
extremely  feeble.  He  was  sitting  or  lying  in  the  house, 
perfectly  blind,  and  having  taken  no  sustenance  for  three 
days.  Can  it  be  imagined  that  a  wise  and  humane  man, 
in  these  circumstances,  would  have  had  him  carried  forth, 
and  plunged  into  cold  water,  which,  in  his  exhausted  state, 
would  have  been  equally  distressing  and  dangerous  ?  It 
cannot  be  for  a  moment  supposed.  Nothing  like  it  is 
hinted.  Ananias  simply  directs  him  to  "  stand  up  and  be 
baptized."  "  And  immediately  there  fell  from  his  eyes  as 
it  had  been  scales ;  and  he  received  sight  forthwith,  and 
arose,  and  was  baptized."  It  was  after  the  baptism,  as 
we  learn,  that  he  received  sustenance  and  was  "  strength- 
ened." It  would  really  seem  as  if  no  impartial  reader 
could  receive  any  other  impression  from  this  account,  than 
that  Paul  stood  up,  in  the  apartment,  in  which  Ananias 
found  him,  and  there  received  baptism  by  pouring  or 
sprinkling  on  him  a  small  quantity  of  that  water  which  is 
applied  in  this  ordinance  as  a  symbol  of  spiritual  cleansing. 
Again,  the  baptism  of  the  Ethiopian  eunuch,  when  duly 
considered,  will  be  found  equally  remote  from  affording  the 
smallest  countenance  to  that  conclusion  in  favour  of  immer- 
sion, which  has  been  so  often  and  so  confidently  drawn 
from  it. 

The  eunuch  was  travelling  on  the  public  high  way,  when 
Philip  met  him.  They  had  been  reading  and  commenting 
on  a  prophecy  of  the  Messiah,  in  which  mention  is  made 
of  his  sprinkling  many  nations.  When  they  came  to  a 
rivulet  of  water,  the  eunuch  said,  '  See,  here  is  water,  what 
doth  hinder  me  to  be  baptized?'  Philip  had,  no  doubt, 
been  explaining  to  him  the  nature,  design,  and  obligation 
of  this  ordinance,  or  he  would  not  have  been  likely  to  ask 
such  a  question.  The  servant  of  God  consented  to  baptize 
him;  and,  as  they  were  travelling,  and  probably  destitute 
of  any  convenient  vessel  for  dipping  up  a  portion  of  water 
from  the  stream,  they  both  went  down  to  the  water,  proba- 
bly no  further  than  to  its  margin ;  far  enough  to  take  up  a 
small  portion  of  it  to  sprinkle  or  pour  on  the  eunuch.  The 
narrative,  in  the  original,  ascertains  nothing  more  than  that 
they  both  went  to  and  from  the  water.  In  our  translation, 
indeed,  it  is  said,  they  both  went  down  into  the  water,  and 


96  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

came  up  out  of  the  water.  But,  when  we  look  into  the 
original  text,  we  find  the  strict  meaning  of  the  terms  em- 
ployed, to  be,  that  Philip  and  the  eunuch  went  down  the 
banks  to  the  water,  and  coming  from  the  water,  reascended 
the  banks  again,  to  the  place  where  the  chariot  in  which 
they  rode  had  been  left.  The  same  form  of  expression  is 
used  as  in  the  case  of  Peter  and  the  tribute  money,  (Matt. 
xvii.  27.)  "  Go  thou  to  the  sea,  and  cast  an  hook,"  &c. 
Here  we  cannot  suppose  that  our  Lord  meant  to  command 
Peter  to  plunge  into  the  sea,  but  .only  to  go  to  the  water's 
edge,  and  cast  in  a  hook.  The  same  form  of  expres- 
sion is  also  employed  in  many  other  passages  of  the 
New  Testament,  where  immersion  is  wholly  out  of  the 
question :  As  in  John,  ii.  12,  where  it  is  said,  Jesus  went 
down  to  Capernaum  ;  Acts  vii.  15,  Jacob  went  down  into 
Egypt;  Acts  xviii.  22,  He  went  down  to  Antioch,  &c. 
Surely,  no  one  will  dream  of  immersion  in  any  of  these 
cases.  There  is  nothing,  then,  in  any  of  the  language  here 
used,  which  necessarily,  or  even  probably,  implies  immer- 
sion. At  any  rate,  the  terms  employed  apply  equally  to 
both.  There  is  the  same  evidence  that  Philip  was  plunged, 
as  that  the  eunuch  was.  It  is  said  they  both  went  to  the 
water.  Nor  can  we  consider  it  as  at  all  likely  that,  in  the 
circumstances  in  which  they  were  placed  as  travellers,  they 
were  either  of  them  immersed.  It  is  plain,  therefore,  that 
all  the  confidence  which  our  Baptist  brethren  have  so  often 
expressed,  that  the  case  of  the  Ethiopian  eunuch  is  a  cer- 
tain example  of  immersion,  must  be  regarded  as  presenting 
no  solid  evidence  in  their  favour,  and  as  really  amounting 
to  a  gross  imposition  on  popular  credulity. 

The  next  remarkable  instance  of  baptism  recorded  in  the 
New  Testament,  is  that  of  Cornelius  and  his  household. 
Cornelius,  a  "  devout  man,  who  feared  God,"  was  directed, 
in  a  vision,  to  send  for  Peter,  the  apostle,  who  should  im- 
part to  him  the  knowledge  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  Peter, 
on  his  arrival,  having  ascertained  wherefore  Cornelius  had 
sent  for  him,  unfolded  to  him,  and  to  all  who  were  con- 
vened in  his  house,  the  way  of  salvation.  "  While  he  was 
yet  speaking,  the  Holy  Ghost  fell  upon  all  of  them  which 
heard  the  word.  Then  answered  Peter,  Can  any  man 
forbid  water,  that  these  should  not  be  baptized,  who  have 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  97 

received  the  Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  we  ?  And  he  com- 
manded them  to  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord." 

In  this  passage,  there  is  nothing  that  has  the  remotest 
appearance  of  immersion.  No  hint  is  given  of  the  candi- 
dates for  baptism  being  led  out  of  the  house,  to  a  river  or 
pool,  for  the  purpose  of  being  dipped.  The  language  of 
Peter  has  an  entirely  different  aspect.  "  Can  any  man 
forbid  water ^  that  these  should  not  be  baptized?"  That 
is,  "  Can  any  man  forbid  water  being  brought  in  a  conve- 
nient vessel,  to  be  applied  by  pouring  or  sprinkling  ?"  He 
had  just  spoken  of  the  Holy  Ghost  being  poured  out  upon 
them ;  and  what  could  be  more  natural  than  that  he  should 
apply  water,  the  emblem  of  spiritual  cleansing,  in  con- 
formity with  the  same  striking  figure?  "They  were  not 
dipped  into  the  Holy  Ghost;  but  the  Holy  Ghost  was 
poured  upon  them.  They  were  not  applied  to  the  Holy 
Ghost;  but  the  Holy  Ghost  was  applied  to  them.  He 
"fell  upon  them;"  and  the  introduction  of  water,  to  be 
applied  in  a  corresponding  manner,  was  immediately  au- 
thorized. 

The  baptism  of  the  jailer  and  his  household,  at  Philippi, 
still  more  decisively  leads  to  the  same  conclusion.  If  we 
examine  the  circumstances  which  attended  this  baptism, 
they  will  be  found  to  preclude,  not  merely  the  probability, 
but  I  may  say  with  confidence,  the  possibility  of  its  having 
been  performed  by  immersion.  Paul  and  Silas  were  close- 
ly confined  in  prison  when  this  solemn  service  was  per- 
formed. While  they  were  engaged  in  "  praying  and  sing- 
ing praises  to  God,"  a  great  earthquake  shook  the  prison 
to  its  foundation,  and  the  bonds  of  the  prisoners  were 
immediately  unloosed.  The  jailer,  awaking  from  his 
sleep,  called  for  a  light,  and  sprang  in,  and  came  trembling, 
and  fell  down  before  Paul  and  Silas,  and  said,  "  Sirs,  what 
must  I  do  to  be  saved?"  And  they  said,  "  Believe  on  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved,  and  thy  house. 
And  they  spake  unto  him  the  word,  and  to  all  that  were  in 
his  house.  And  he  took  them  the  same  hour  of  the  night, 
and  washed  their  stripes,  and  was  baptized,  he  and  all  his, 
straightway."  This  whole  transaction,  you  will  observe, 
occurred  a  little  after  midnight,  and  in  a  prison,  that  is,  in  the 
outer  prison,  for  the  jailer  seems  to  have  brought  them  out 

I 


y©  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

of  the  dungeon,  or  "  inner  prison,"  into  some  other  apart- 
ment of  the  edifice.  For  it  was  not  until  next  morning, 
some  hours  after  the  baptism,  that  the  magistrates  gave  the 
keeper  permission  to  let  them  out  of  the  prison.  He  and 
his  family  were  evidently  baptized  "  the  same  hour  of  the 
night,"  that  is,  between  midnight,  when  we  are  expressly 
told  the  earthquake  occurred,  and  day ;  and  while  yet  in  the 
place  of  confinement.  Now,  I  ask,  how  can  we  imagine 
it  possible  that  the  jailer  and  his  family  should  be  baptized 
by  immersion,  in  the  circumstances  in  which  they  were 
placed  ?  We  cannot  suppose  that  there  was  a  river,  or  a 
pool  of  water,  or  a  baptistery  within  the  walls  of  the  prison, 
adapted  to  meet  an  occasion  as  unexpected  as  any  thing 
could  be,  which  had  never  occurred  there  before,  and  was 
never  likely  to  occur,  in  like  circumstances  again.  He 
who  can  believe  this,  must  be  ready  to  adopt  any  supposi- 
tion, however  extravagant,  for  the  sake  of  an  hypothesis. 
As  little  can  we  imagine  that  Paul  and  Silas  would  be 
dishonest  enough  to  steal  out  of  the  prison  by  night, 
and  accompany  the  jailer  and  his  family  to  the  river 
which  runs  near  the  city  of  Philippi,  for  the  purpose  of 
plunging  them ;  especially  as  we  know,  on  the  one  hand, 
how  backward  they  were,  the  next  morning,  to  quit  the 
prison,  unless  brought  out  by  the  magistrates  who  had  ille- 
gally imprisoned  them;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  how  much 
terrified  the  jailer  was  at  the  thought  of  the  prisoners 
escaping  from  confinement,  and  of  his  being  responsible 
even  with  his  own  life,  for  their  safe  keeping. 

In  like  manner,  we  might  go  over  all  the  other  cases  of 
baptism  recorded  in  the  New  Testament,  and  show  that, 
in  no  one  case,  have  we  any  evidence  that  the  ordinance 
was  administered  by  immersion.  Now,  as  the  disciples  of 
Christ  baptized  such  great  multitudes — even  more,  at  one 
period  than  John;  can  we  imagine,  if  the  constant,  or 
even  the  common  mode  of  baptizing  had  been  by  plung- 
ing the  whole  body  under  water,  and  especially,  if  they 
had  laid  great  stress  on  adherence  to  this  mode ;  can  we 
imagine,  I  say,  that  amidst  so  many  cases  of  baptism, 
some  term  of  expression,  some  incidental  circumstance 
would  not  have  occurred,  from  which  the  fact  of  immer- 
sion might  have  been  clearly  manifested,  or  irresistibly 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTIS3I.  99 

inferred  ?  One  thing  is  certain.  The  inspired  writers  of 
the  New  Testament  could  not  possibly  have  regarded 
immersion  in  baptism  in  the  same  light  in  which  it  is  re- 
garded by  our  Baptist  brethren.  The  latter,  consider  their 
mode  of  applying  water,  as  essential  to  the  ordinance. 
They  dwell  upon  it  with  unceasing  fondness ;  introduce  it 
into  every  discussion  ;  and  lose  no  opportunity  of  recom- 
mending and  urging  it  as  that,  without  which  an  alleged 
baptism  is  a  nullity ;  nay,  an  offence  to  the  Head  of  the 
church.  While  the  former,  though  speaking,  directly  or 
indirectly  on  the  subject,  in  almost  every  page  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  under  a  great  variety  of  aspects,  have  not 
stated  a  single  fact,  or  employed  a  single  term,  which 
evinces  that  they  either  preferred  or  practised  immersion  in 
any  case.  They  have  stated,  indeed,  some  facts  which 
can  scarcely,  by  possibility,  be  reconciled  with  immersion ; 
but  in  no  instance,  have  they  made  a  representation  which 
is  not  entirely  reconcileable  with  the  practice  of  perfusion 
or  sprinkling.  On  the  supposition  that  the  doctrine  of  our 
Baptist  brethren  is  true,  this  is  a  most  unaccountable  fact ! 
What !  not  one  evangelist  or  apostle,  though  taught  by  the 
Spirit  of  God  what  to  say — kind  enough,  or  wise  enough, 
to  put  this  matter  beyond  a  doubt!  The  unavoidable  in- 
ference is,  that  the  inspired  writers  did  not  deem  the 
mode  of  applying  water  in  baptism,  an  essential  matter ; 
and  did  not  think  it  necessary  to  state  it  precisely;  and,  of 
course,  that  they  differed  entirely  from  our  Baptist  bre- 
thren. 

4.  Even  if  it  could  be  proved  (which  we  know  it  can- 
not be,)  that  the  mode  of  baptism  adopted  in  the  time  of 
Christ  and  his  apostles,  was  that  of  immersion ;  yet  if  that 
method  of  administering  the  ordinance  were  not  signifi- 
cant of  some  truth,  which  the  other  modes  cannot  repre- 
sent, we  are  plainly  at  liberty  to  regard  it  as  a  non-essen- 
tial circumstance,  from  which  we  may  depart  when  expe- 
diency requires  it,  as  we  are  all  wont  to  do  in  other  cases, 
even  with  respect  to  positive  institutions.  For  example, 
the  Lord's  Supper  was,  no  doubt,  originally  instituted 
with  unleavened  bread ;  and  this  was,  probably,  at  first,  the 
common  custom.     But  as  being  leavened  or  unleavened 


100  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

had  nothing  to  do  with  the  design  and  scope  of  the  ordi- 
nance ;  as  bread  of  either  kind  is  equally  emblematical  of 
that  spiritual  nourishment  which  it  is  intended  to  repre- 
sent; most  professing  Christians,  and  our  Baptist  brethren 
among  the  rest,  feel  authorized  to  celebrate  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per with  leavened  bread  without  the  smallest  scruple. 

Again:  the  manner  of  sitting  at  the  Lord's  Supper,  was, 
in  conformity  with  the  then  prevailing  posture  at  feasts,, 
to  recline  on  the  elbow  on  a  couch.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  this  was  the  uniform  posture  at  the  convivial 
table,  at  that  time ;  and  in  the  narratives  of  the  evangelists, 
we  have  abundant  evidence  that  the  same  posture  was 
adopted  by  our  blessed  Lord  in  the  institution  of  the  sacra- 
mental Supper.  But  as  it  was  only  a  circumstance  con- 
nected with  the  habits  of  those  days,  we  do  not  feel 
bound ;  and  our  Baptist  brethren  among  others,  do  not  feel 
bound,  in  administering  this  ordinance,  to  conform  to  the 
original  mode.  We  consider  the  sacrament  as  completely 
and  validly  dispensed,  if  bread  and  wine  be  reverently  re- 
ceived, in  commemoration  of  the  Saviour's  death,  with  any 
posture  of  the  body.  Nay,  the  example  of  our  Saviour 
himself,  plainly  shows  that,  under  a  change  of  circum- 
stances, non-essential  modes,  originally  used,  may  be  dis- 
pensed with.  The  prescribed  ritual  of  the  Passover  re- 
quired that  the  lamb  should  be  eaten  with  shoes  on  the 
feet,  and  with  staves  in  the  hand ;  but  this  custom  was  not 
followed  by  Him  or  his  disciples,  and,  perhaps,  never  was 
observed  after  the  entrance  into  Canaan.  But  was  the 
Passover  rendered  either  less  perfect,  or  less  useful,  for  all 
practical  purposes,  by  this  omission  ?  Surely  we  need  not 
wait  for  an  answer. 

Now,  unless  it  can  be  proved,  that  plunging  the  body 
into  water,  and  lifting  it  out  again,  was  designed  to  be  em- 
blematical of  something  which  cannot  be  otherwise  ex- 
pressed, we  have  full  liberty  given  us  by  the  example  of 
our  Lord  himself,  to  consider  this  mode  as  an  unimportant 
circumstance.  If  the  cleansing  element  of  water  be  ap- 
plied, in  any  reverential  mode,  to  the  human  body,  the 
whole  symbolical  expression  of  the  ordinance  is  attained, 
provided  convenience  and  decorum  be  duly  consulted.     If 


SERMONS  OK  BAPTISM.  101 

the  cleansing  or  purifying  quality  of  the  element  used,  be 
the  idea  intended  to  be  set  forth  in  the  emblem ;  and  if  the 
greater  part,  as  we  have  seen,  of  the  typical  purifications 
prescribed  under  the  ceremonial  economy  were  effected 
by  sprinkling;  it  is  plain  that  the  emblem  is  complete, 
however  the  cleansing  element  may  be  applied. 


SERMON  IV. 


THE  MODE  OF  ADMINISTERING  BAPTISM. 

Can  any  man   forbid  water,  that  these  should  not  be  baptized  ? — 
Acts  X.  47. 

5.  The  difficulties  attending  the  administration  of 
baptism  by  immersion^  in  m,any  cases,  ought  to  satisfy  us 
that  this  mode  of  administering  the  ordinance  cannot  be 
the  only  valid  mode,  and  is  not  the  most  proper  and  edi~ 
fying  mode. 

It  is  perfectly  evident,  to  every  reflecting  mind,  that  the 
obstacles  which  may  be  conceived,  and  which  very  fre- 
quently, in  fact,  occur,  to  render  baptism  by  immersion 
difficult,  if  not  impracticable,  are  very  many,  and  very 
serious.  It  will  be  sufficient  to  hint  at  a  few  of  the  more 
familiar  and  obvious.  It  is  well  known  that  some  very 
large  districts  of  country,  in  various  parts  of  our  globe, 
are  so  parched  and  dry,  and  streams  of  water  so  rare,  or 
rather,  in  many  cases,  so  unknown,  for  many  miles  together, 
that  the  means  of  immersing  a  human  body,  in  any  natural 
stream  or  pool  of  water,  cannot  possibly  be  obtained  but 
with  great  trouble  and  expense;  a  trouble  and  expense 
impracticable  to  a  large  portion  of  every  community  in- 
habiting those  countries.  There  are  other  parts  of  our 
globe,  near  the  polar  regions,  where,  during  the  major  por- 
tion of  every  year,  the  constant  reign  of  severe  frost,  seals 
up  every  natural  stream  and  fountain,  and  renders  the  im- 
mersion of  a  human  body  not  merely  difficult,  but  imprac- 
ticable, without  great  labour  and  cost.  Nor  is  this  all ;  even 
in  the  temperate  and  well  watered  latitudes,  there  are  sea- 
sons of  the  year,  often  of  four  or  five  month's  continuance, 
when  baptism  by  immersion  is  generally  dangerous,  and. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  103 

in  many  cases,  highly  so,  to  the  health,  and  even  the  lives 
of  both  those  who  administer,  and  those  who  receive  the 
ordinance.*  And,  finally,  at  all  seasons,  persons  labouring 
under  disease,  can  never  be  baptized  in  this  mode,  with 
safety,  at  all ;  and,  of  course,  must  be  deprived  entirely  of 
the  privilege  of  receiving  this  seal  of  the  Christian  cove- 
nant, so  reasonable  in  itself,  and  so  gratifying  to  the  pious 
mind.  It  is  also  certain,  that  Baptist  ministers  who  are 
aged  and  infirm,  can  never  safely  officiate  in  baptizing  in 
any  case;  and  when  they  are  men  remarkably  frail  and 
feeble  in  body,  they  can  never  undertake,  without  manifest 
danger,  to  baptize  individuals  of  large  stature,  or  more  than 
common  corpulency.  To  all  which  may  be  added,  that 
the  public  baptism  of  females,  with  all  the  delicacy  and 
care  which  can  possibly  be  employed,  is  certainly,  as  thou- 
sands attest,  a  practice  little  in  keeping  with  those  religious 
feelings  and  impressions  with  which  it  is  desirable  that 
every  Christian  solemnity  should  be  attended. 

Now,  contrast  all  these  difficulties,  which,  surely,  form 

*  The  Rev,  Dr.  Austin,  in  his  answer  to  Mr.  Merrill,  speaks  thus — 
"  In  besieged  cities,  where  there  are  thousands,  and  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  people ;  in  sandy  deserts,  like  those  of  Africa,  Arabia,  and 
Palestine  ;  in  the  northern  regions,  where  the  streams,  if  there  be  any, 
are  shut  up  with  impenetrable  ice;  and  in  severe  and  extensive 
droughts,  like  that  which  took  place  in  the  time  of  Ahab;  sufficiency 
of  water  for  animal  subsistence  is  scarcely  to  be  procured.  Now, 
suppose  God  should,  according  to  his  predictions,  pour  out  plentiful 
effusions  of  his  Spirit,  so  that  all  the  inhabitants  of  one  of  these  regions 
or  cities,  should  be  born  in  a  day.  Upon  the  Baptist  hypothesis,  there 
is  an  absolute  impossibility  that  they  should  Lie  baptized,  while  there 
is  this  scarcity  of  water ;  and  this  may  last  as  long  as  they  live."  p.  41. 

So  also,  Mr.  Walker,  in  his  "  Doctrine  of  Baptisms,"  (chapter  10) 
speaks  of  a  Jew,  who,  while  travelling  with  Christians,  in  the  time  of 
Marcus  Aurelius  Antoninus,  about  sixty  or  seventy  years  after  the 
apostles,  was  converted,  fell  sick,  and  desired  baptism.  Not  having 
water,  they  sprinkled  him  thrice  with  sand,  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  recovered,  and  his  case  was  re- 
ported to  the  bishop,  (or  pastor,  there  being  no  prelates  then)  who  de- 
cided that  the  man  was  baptized,  {si  modo  aqua  denuo  perfunderatur) 
if  he  only  had  water  poured  on  him  again.  This  record  shows,  not 
merely  that  the  "  difficulties"  referred  to,  are  far  from  being  ideal ; 
but  also  that  when  the  defect  of  the  baptism  by  sand  was  attempted 
to  be  supplied,  it  was  not  by  any  sort  of  immersion,  but  only  by  the 
pouring  on  of  water. 


104  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

a  mass  of  no  small  magnitude,  with  the  entire  absence  of 
every  difficulty  in  baptizing  by  sprinkling  or  aflusion. 
According  to  our  plan,  which,  we  have  no  doubt,  is  by  far 
the  most  scriptural  and  edifying,  baptism  may  be  performed 
with  equal  ease  and  convenience  in  all  countries ;  at  all 
seasons  of  the  year ;  in  all  situations  of  health  or  sickness  ; 
with  equal  safety  by  all  ministers,  whether  young  or  old, 
athletic  or  feeble  ;  and  in  all  circumstances  that  can  well  be 
conceived.  How  admirably  does  this  accord  with  the 
Gospel  economy,  which  is  not  intended  to  be  confined  to 
any  one  people,  or  to  any  particular  climate ;  but  is  equally 
adapted,  in  all  its  principles,  and  in  all  its  rites  to  every 
*'  kindred,  and  people,  and  nation,  and  tongue  !" 

Accordingly,  it  is  a  notorious  fact,  that,  in  consideration 
of  the  difficulties  which  have  been  mentioned  as  attending 
immersion,  a  large  body  of  Baptists,  in  Holland,  I  mean 
the  Mennonites,  who  were  once  warm  and  uncompromising 
contenders  for  this  mode  of  administering  baptism,  at 
length  gave  it  up,  and,  while  they  still  baptize  none  but 
adults,  have  been,  for  more  than  a  hundred  years,  in  the 
practice  of  pouring  water  on  the  head  of  the  candidate, 
through  the  hand  of  the  administrator.  They  found  that 
when  candidates  for  baptism  were  lying  on  sick  beds ;  or 
confined  in  prison ;  or  in  a  state  of  peculiarly  delicate 
health ;  or  in  various  other  unusual  situations,  which  may 
be  easily  imagined ;  there  was  so  much  difficulty,  not  to 
say,  in  some  cases,  a  total  impossibility  in  baptizing  by 
plunging ;  that  they  deliberately,  as  a  denomination,  after 
the  death  of  their  first  leader,  agreed  to  lay  aside,  as  I  said, 
the  practice  of  immersion,  and  substituted  the  plan  of  affu- 
sion. 

There  is  one  difficulty  more,  in  reference  to  the  mode  of 
baptism  by  immersion,  of  which  it  is  not  easy  to  speak,  on 
an  occasion  like  the  present,  without  appearing  to  intend 
ridicule  of  an  ordinance  so  solemn  and  important.  Fidelity 
to  the  subject,  however,  demands  that  I  speak  of  it ;  and  I 
trust  no  one  will  suspect  me  of  a  design  to  make  any  other 
than  a  perfectly  grave  and  fair  use  of  the  matter  to  which  I 
refer.  The  circumstance  to  which  I  allude  is,  that  in  the 
third,  fourth,  and  immediately  following  centuries — in  the 
days  of  Cyprian,  Cyril,  Athanasius,  and  Chrysostom — 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  105 

when,  as  all  agree,  the  mode  of  baptizing  by  immersion 
was  the  most  prevalent  method ;  there  is  no  historical  fact 
more  perfectly  established,  than  that  whenever  baptism  was 
thus  administered,  the  candidate,  whether  infant  or  adult, 
male  or  female,  was  entirely  divested  of  all  clothing:  not 
merely  of  outer  garments,  but,  I  repeat,  of  all  clothing.  No 
exception  was  allowed  in  any  case,  even  when  the  most 
timid  and  delicate  female  importunately  desired  it.  This 
fact  is  established,  not  only  by  the  most  direct  and  unequiv- 
ocal statements,  and  that  by  a  number  of  writers,  but  also 
by  the  narration  of  a  number  of  curious  particulars  connect- 
ed with  this  practice.*  Among  the  rest,  we  are  told  of 
scenes  of  indecorum  exhibited  in  the  baptisteries  of  those 
days,  which  convinced  the  friends  of  religion  that  the  prac- 
tice ought  to  be  discontinued,  and  it  M^as  finally  laid  aside. 
Perhaps  it  will  be  asked,  whether  this  fact  in  the  history 
of  Christian  baptism  is  adverted  to  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
flecting odium,  in  a  sinister  and  indirect  manner,  on  the 
practice  of  immersion  ?  I  answer,  by  no  means ;  but  sim- 
ply for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  in  tracing  the  history 
of  baptism  by  immersion,  we  have  the  very  same  evidence 
in  favour  of  immersing  divested  of  all  clothings  that  we 
have  for  immersing  at  all ;  that,  so  far  as  the  history  of  the 
church,  subsequent  to  the  apostolic  age,  informs  us,  these 
two  practices  must  stand  or  fall  together  ;t  and  that  an  ap- 

*  The  zealous  Baptist,  Robert  Robinson,  bears,  on  this  subject,  the 
following  testimony :  "  The  primitive  Christians  baptized  naked. 
Nothing  is  easier  than  to  give  proof  of  this  by  quotations  from  the 
authentic  writings  of  the  men  who  administered  baptism,  and  who 
certainly  knew  in  what  way  they  themselves  performed  it.  There  is 
no  ancient  historical  fact  better  authenticated  than  this.  The  evidence 
does  not  go  on  the  evidence  of  the  single  word,  naked;  for  then  a  read- 
er might  suspect  allegory;  but  on  facts  reported,  and  many  rejisons 
assigned  for  the  practice."  History  of  Baptism,  p.  85.  He  then 
quotes  several  examples  dated  in  the  fourth  century. 

t  The  learned  Wall  speaks  on  the  subject  thus:  "The  ancient 
Christians,  when  they  were  baptized  by  immersion,  were  all  baptized 
naked ;  whether  they  were  men,  women  or  children.  The  proofs  of 
this,  I  shall  omit,  because  it  is  a  clear  case.  The  English  Antipoedo- 
baptisls  need  not  have  made  so  great  an  outcry  against  Mr.  Baxter 
for  his  saying  that  they  baptized  naked  ;  for  if  they  had,  it  would  have 
been  no  more  than  the  primitive  Christians  did.  They  thought  it 
better  represented  the  putting  off  the  old  man,  and  also  thenak^ness 


106 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 


pendage  to  baptism  so  revolting,  so  immoral,  and  so  entire- 
ly inadmissible,  plainly  shows  that  those  who  practised  it, 
must  have  been  chargeable  with  a  superstitious  and  extra- 
vagant adoption  of  a  mere  form,  which,  from  its  character, 
we  are  compelled  to  believe  was  a  human  invention,  and 
took  its  rise  in  the  rudeness  of  growing  superstition,  per- 
haps from  a  source  still  more  impure  and  criminal. 

Besides,  if  the  principle  for  which  our  Baptist  brethren 
contend,  be  correct ;  if  the  immersion  of  the  whole  body  be 
essential  to  Christian  baptism,  and  if  the  thing  signified  be 
the  cleansing  and  purifying  of  the  individual  by  an  ablu- 
tion which  must  of  necessity  extend  to  the  whole  person ; 
it  would  really  seem  that  performing  this  ceremony,  divest- 
ed of  all  clothing,  is  essential  to  its  emblematic  meaning. 
Who  ever  thought  of  covering  the  hands  with  gloves  when 
they  were  about  to  be  washed ;  or  expected  really  to  cleanse 
them  through  such  a  covering  ?  No  wonder,  then,  when 
the  principle  began  to  find  a  place  in  the  church,  that  the 
submersion  of  every  part  of  the  body  in  water ;  that  the 
literal  bathing  of  the  whole  person  was  essential  both  to  the 
expressiveness  and  the  validity  of  the  emblematical  trans- 
action ;  no  wonder,  I  say,  that  the  obvious  consequence 
should  soon  be  admitted,  that  the  whole  body  ought  to  be 
uncovered,  as  never  fails  to  be  the  case,  with  any  member 
of  the  body  which  we  wish  to  be  successfully  cleansed  by 
bathing.  And  we  have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  that,  if  we 
fully  adopted  the  general  principle  of  our  Baptist  brethren 
in  relation  to  this  matter,  we  should  no  more  think  of  sub- 
jecting the  body  to  that  process  which  must,  in  order  to  its 
validity,  be  strictly  emblematical  of  a  complete  spiritual 
bathing,  while  covered  with  clothes ;  than  we  should  think, 
in  common  life,  of  washing  the  hands  or  the  feet,  while 
carefully  covered  with  the  articles  of  dress  with  wdiich  they 
are  commonly  clothed.  Whereas,  if  the  principle  of  Poedo- 
baptists  on  this  subject  be  adopted,  then  the  solemn  appli- 
cation of  water  to  that  part  of  the  body  which  is  an  epitome 
of  the  whole  person,  and  which  is  always,  as  a  matter  of 

of  Christ  on  the  cross.  Moreover,  as  baptism  is  a  washing,  they 
judged  it  should  be  the  washing  of  the  body,  not  of  the  clothes." 
Wall,  Chapter  XV.  Part  II. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  107 

course,  uncovered,  is   amply  sufficient  to   answer  every 
purpose  both  of  emblem  and  of  benefit. 

Besides,  let  me  appeal  to  our  Baptist  brethren,  by  ask- 
ing, if  they  verily  believe  that  the  primitive  and  apostolic 
mode  of  administering  baptism  was  by  immersion,  and  that 
this  immersion  was  performed  in  a  state  of  entire  naked- 
ness; how  can  they  dare,  upon  their  principles,  to  depart, 
as  to  one  iota  from  that  mode?  Let  them  not  say,  that 
they  carefully  retain  the  substance,  the  essential  characters 
of  the  plan  of  immersion.  Very  true.  This  is  our  plea; 
and  it  accords  very  well  with  what  we  consider  as  the 
correct  system ;  but  in  the  mouth  of  a  Baptist  it  is  altogether 
inadmissible.  The  institute  in  question  is  a  "  positive" 
one  ;  and,  according  to  him,  we  must  not  depart  one  jot  or 
tittle  from  the  original  plan. 

These  considerations,  my  friends,  strike  me  as  affording 
decisive  evidence,  that  a  mode  of  baptism,  attended  with  so 
many  real  and  formidable  difficulties,  cannot  be  of  divine 
appointment;  at  any  rate  that  it  cannot  be  universally  bind- 
ing on  the  Church  of  God ;  and  that  laying  so  much  stress 
upon  the  completeness  of  the  submersion,  is  servility  and 
superstition.  We  may  say  of  this  ordinance,  as  our  Lord 
said  of  the  Sabbath,  Baptism  was  made  for  Tnan,  and  not 
mmxfor  baptism.  Where  a  particular  mode  of  complying 
with  a  religious  observance  would  be,  in  many  cases,  "  a 
yoke  of  bondage,"  and  one,  too,  for  which  no  divine  war- 
rant could  be  pleaded,  it  would  surely  argue  the  very  sla- 
very of  superstition,  to  enforce  that  mode  of  the  observance 
as  essential  to  a  regular  standing  in  the  visible  family  of 
Christ. 

6.  As  a  further  objection  to  the  doctrine  of  our  Baptist 
brethren  in  relation  to  the  mode  of  baptism,  let  us  examine 
some  of  the  figurative  language  of  Scripture  which  refers 
to  this  ordinance;  and  especially  certain  passages  on 
which  they  are  accustomed  to  place  the  greatest  reliance 
for  the  support  of  their  cause. 

Perhaps  no  passages  of  Scripture  have  been  more  fre- 
quently and  confidently  pressed  into  the  service  of  baptism 
by  immersion  than  those  which  are  found  in  Romans  vi. 
3,  4,  and  Colossians  ii.  12.  In  the  former  we  find  the 
following:  "Know  ye  not,  that  so  many  of  us  as  were 


108  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

baptized  into  Jesus  Christ,  were  baptized  into  his  death  ? 
Therefore  we  are  buried  with  him  by  baptism  into  death ; 
that  like  as  Christ  was  raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the 
glory  of  the  Father,  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  new- 
ness of  life."  Corresponding  with  this,  in  Colossians  ii.  12, 
the  following  passage  occurs  :  "  Buried  with  him  in  bap- 
tism ;  wherein  also  ye  are  risen  with  him  through  the 
faith  of  the  operation  of  God,  who  hath  raised  him  from 
the  dead." 

Now,  our  Baptist  brethren,  believing  and  insisting  that 
baptism  and  immersion  ought  to  be  considered,  in  all  cases, 
as  synonymous  terms,  take  for  granted  that  the  expression, 
"  Buried  with  him  in  baptism,"  is  intended  to  refer  to  the 
resemblance  between  the  interment  of  a  dead  body,  and  its 
subsequent  resurrection  from  beneath  the  surface  of  the 
earth;  and  the  immersion  of  a  baptized  person  entirely 
under  the  water,  and  raising  him  up  again  from  beneath  the 
surface  of  the  fluid.  In  a  word,  our  Baptist  brethren  assure 
us,  that  the  design  of  the  apostle  in  these  passages  is  to 
say,  that  "  the  baptized  person's  communion  with  Christ 
in  his  death  and  burial,  is  represented  by  his  being  laid 
under  the  water;  and  his  communion  with  him  in  his  re- 
surrection, by  his  being  raised  out  of  it."  In  this  general 
interpretation  of  the  figure  many  Pcedobaptists  have  agreed; 
and  have  thus  not  a  little  confirmed  the  confidence  of  anti- 
poedobaptists  in  their  cause.  I  am  persuaded,  however, 
that  a  candid  examination  of  the  real  import  of  the  figura- 
tive language  before  us,  will  show  that  this  confidence  is 
entirely  unfounded. 

The  aposde,  in  the  preceding  part  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  had  shown  that  Christians  are  justified  by  faith 
in  the  righteousness  of  Christ.  He  proceeds  in  the  sixth 
chapter  to  obviate  the  objection,  that  this  doctrine  tends  to 
licentiousness.  **  What  shall  we  say,  then  ?  Shall  we 
continue  in  sin  that  grace  may  abound?  God  forbid  !"  He 
rejects  with  abhorrence  the  odious  thought.  *'  How  shall 
we  that  are  dead  to  sin  live  any  longer  therein  ?"  He  then 
adverts  to  the  significance  of  baptism,  which,  being  the 
ordinance  which  seals  our  introduction  into  the  family  of 
Christ,  may  be  considered  as  exhibiting  both  the  first  prin- 
ciples of  Gospel  truth,  and  the  first  elements  of  Christian 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  109 

character.  "Know  ye  not,  that  so  many  of  us  as  were 
baptized  into  Jesus  Christ,  were  baptized  into  his  death  ?" 
He  then  infers,  that  since  baptism  has  so  immediate  a 
reference  to  the  death  of  Christ,  it  must,  by  consequence, 
be  connected  also  with  his  resurrection ;  and  that,  as  in  the 
former  view,  it  teaches  the  regenerated  the  abandoning  of 
the  old  life  of  sin ;  so,  in  the  latter,  it  equally  teaches  them 
the  pursuit  and  progress  of  the  new  life  of  righteousness. 
'*  Therefore  we  are  buried  with  him  by  baptism  into  death  ; 
that  like  as  Christ  was  raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the 
glory  of  the  Father,  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  new- 
ness of  life." 

The  obvious  design  of  the  apostle  is  to  illustrate  the  cha- 
racter and  obligations  of  believers,  from  the  circumstance, 
that  they  are,  in  a  certain  respect,  conformed  to  Christ's 
death:  that  as  he  died /br  sin,  so  they  are  dead,  or  are 
under  obligations  to  be  dead,  to  sin ;  that  is,  they  are  holy, 
or  are,  by  their  profession,  obliged  to  be  holy.  "  So  many 
of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ,  were  baptized  into 
his  death."  And  this  is  explained  by  what  follows.  "  In 
that  Christ  died,  he  died  unto  sin  (or  on  account  of  sin) 
once ;  but  in  that  he  liveth,  he  liveth  unto  God.  Likewise 
reckon  ye  also  yourselves  to  be  dead  indeed  unto  sin,  (or  in 
respect  to  sin,)  but  alive  unto  God  through  Jesus  Christ." 
This  is  what  was  signified  by  baptism.  And  so  believers 
were  baptized  into  Chrisfs  death:  not  that  baptism  was  a 
symbol  of  death,  or  the  state  of  the  dead ;  for  water,  or 
washing  in  water,  never  was  a  symbol  of  this.  But  water, 
used  in  ceremonial,  whether  by  washing  or  sprinkling,  and 
afterwards  in  Christian  baptism,  always  signified  the  fact, 
or  the  acknowledged  necessity  of  'purification.  Now  being 
dead,  or  in  a  state  of  death  to  sin,  is  the  same  thing  as  to 
be  spiritually  purified,  or  made  holy.  And  this  is  the  very 
thing  that  baptism,  coming  in  the  place  of  absolutions  under 
the  former  economy,  is  exactly  adapted  to  signify.  Or,  to 
say  all  in  a  word,  water  used  in  baptism  is  a  sign  of  that 
moral  purification  of  believers,  which  the  apostle  means  to 
express  by  their  being  crucified,  dead  and  conformed  to 
Christ's  death."  Their  being  dead  in  conformity  with 
Christ,  is  the  expression  which  contains  the  metaphor. 
And  baptism,  as  an  appointed  token  or  symbol,  denotes 

K 


110  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

what  is  signified  by  the  metaphor,  not  the  metaphor  itself."* 
The  sum  of  the  apostle's  illustrations,  then,  so  far  as  the 
point  before  us  is  concerned,  is  simply  this — That  in  bap- 
tism, as  a  rite  emblematical  oi  moral  purification  ^  Christians 
profess  to  be  baptized  into  the  death  of  Christ,  as  well  as 
into  (or  into  the  hope  of)  his  resurrection ;  that  they  are 
dead  and  buried  in  respect  to  sin,  that  is,  in  a  moral  and 
spiritual  sense  ;  so  that  every  Christian  can  say,  with  Paul 
— "  I  am  crucified  with  Christ ;  I  have  been  made  conform- 
able to  his  death;  being  dead  indeed  to  sin,  and  alive 
to  God  by  Jesus  Christ." 

But  besides  all  this,  which  is  sufficient  of  itself  to  show 
how  little  reliance  is  to  be  placed  on  the  gloss  of  this  pas- 
sage adopted  by  our  Baptist  brethren — the  burial  of  Christ 
was  by  no  means  such  as  the  friends  of  this  exposition 
commonly  suppose.  The  body  of  our  Saviour  was  never 
buried  in  the  manner  in  which  we  are  accustomed  to  inter 
human  corpses,  that  is  by  letting  it  down  into  the  bosom  of 
the  earth,  and  covering  it  with  earth.  It  was  placed  in  a 
tomb  hewn  out  of  a  rock ;  not  a  tomb  sunk  in  the  earth, 
but  hollowed  out  of  a  rock,  above  ground,  and  containing 
separate  cells  for  the  reception  of  bodies,  "  as  the  manner 
of  the  Jews  was  to  bury."  Even  supposing,  then,  that  it 
were  yielded  to  our  Baptist  brethren  that  the  design  of  the 
apostle  is  to  teach  the  mode  of  baptism,  by  comparing  it  to 
the  burial  of  Christ,  it  would  by  no  means  serve  their  pur- 
pose. There  was  not  in  fact  any  such  subterranean  im- 
mersion, if  the  expression  may  be  allowed,  as  they  imagine. 
The  body  of  the  Saviour  was  evidently  laid  in  a  stone  cell, 
above  ground,  in  which  no  earth  came  in  contact  with  it, 
and  in  which,  when  the  stone  which  closed  up  the  door 
was  taken  away,  the  body  was  distinctly  visible.  In  short, 
the  burial  of  Christ  no  more  resembled  the  modern  inter- 
ment of  a  dead  body  among  us,  than  the  depositing  such  a 
body,  for  a  time,  in  an  apartment  in  the  basement  story  of 

*  See  Dr.  Woods'  Lectures  on  Infant  Baptism,  p.  188, 189.  See 
this  interpretation  of  Bom.  vi.  3, 4,  and  the  corresponding  passage  in 
Colossians  ii.  12,  well  illustrated  in  the  Essay  on  Baptism,  by  Greville 
Ewing,  D.  D.  of  Glasgow,  and  also  in  a  Dissertation  on  Infant  Bap- 
tism, by  Ralph  Wardlaw,  D.  D.  of  Glasgow  ;  and  still  more  recently, 
by  Professor  (S^Mart,  in  the  Biblical  Repository,  p.  327. 332. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  Ill 

a  dwelling  house,  the  floor  of  which  was  either  not  sunk 
below  the  surface  of  the  earth  at  all,  or,  if  any,  not  more 
than  a  few  inches ;  admitting  of  free  ingress  and  egress  as 
a  common  inhabited  room.  The  figure  in  question,  then, 
does  not  serve  the  turn  of  our  Baptist  brethren ;  thus 
affording  another  proof,  that  nothing  more  was  intended  by 
its  use,  than  to  set  forth  that,  by  being  baptized  into  the 
death  of  Christ,  we  profess  to  be  dead  and  buried  in 
respect  to  sin,  without  any  reference  whatever  to  the  mode 
in  which  either  the  burial  or  the  baptism  might  be  per- 
formed. 

Accordingly,  in  the  verse  immediately  preceding  that 
before  commented  on,  in  the  second  Epistle  to  the  Colos- 
sians,  the  following  passage  occurs,  evidently  intended  to 
teach  the  same  lesson :  "  In  whom  also  ye  are  circumcised 
with  the  circumcision  made  without  liands,  in  putting  off 
the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh,  by  the  circumcision  of 
Christ."  And  in  the  verse  immediately  following  that  in 
which  the  burial  of  Christ  is  alluded  to,  the  figure  of  cir- 
cumcision as  an  emblem  of  spiritual  cleansing,  is  still  pur- 
sued :  "  And  you  being  dead  in  your  sins,  and  the  uncir- 
cumcision  of  your  flesh,  hath  he  quickened  together  with 
him,  having  forgiven  you  all  trespasses."  Here,  it  is  plain, 
the  same  general  idea  is  meant  to  be  conveyed,  as  in  the 
reference  to  baptism,  which  has  come  in  the  room  of  cir- 
cumcision. In  both  the  putting  away  sin ;  the  "  putting  off 
the  sins  of  the  flesh,"  is  emblematically  represented  and 
sealed  :  as  a  man  dead  and  buried  is  cut  off  from  all  tempo- 
ral connections  and  indulgences;  so  the  baptized  man  is 
really,  or  at  least  by  profession,  dead  to  sin,  and  in 
this  way  made  conformable  to  the  death  of  Christ,  in  its 
great  design  and  efficacy,  which  are  to  purify  to  himself  a 
peculiar  people,  dead  to  the  world,  dead  to  carnal  ambition, 
and  secluded  from  every  unhallowed  practice. 

Another  signal  example  of  the  figurative  language  of 
Scripture  applied  to  baptism,  occurs  in  1  Corinthians,  x. 
1,  2.  "  Moreover,  brethren,  I  would  not  that  ye  should  be 
ignorant,  how  that  all  our  fathers  were  under  the  cloud, 
and  all  passed  through  the  sea ;  and  were  all  baptized  unto 
Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea."  Now,  when  we  turn 
to  the  narrative  given  by  Moses,  in  the  fourteenth  chapter 


112  SERMONS  ON  BAmSM. 

of  Exodus^  we  find  that  the  Red  Sea,  through  which  the 
Israelites  passed,  was  divided  before  them  ;  that  the  waters 
stood  up  like  a  wall  on  each  side  ;  and  that  they  passed 
through  ON  DRY  GROUND.  We  are  also  informed,  that  the 
cloud  by  which  their  line  of  march  was  divinely  directed, 
did  not  even  fall  upon  them  in  the  form  of  a  shower,  much 
less  submerge  them  ;  but  that  it  alternately  went  behind 
them  and  before  them ;  now  hanging  in  their  rear,  for  the 
purpose  of  concealing  them  from  their  enemies ;  and  then 
preceding  them  in  their  course,  presenting  a  face  of  splen- 
dour to  them,  and  a  face  of  darkness  to  their  pursuers.  In 
all  this,  there  was  evidently  nothing  like  immersion.  The 
utmost  that  could  have  happened,  in  consistency  with  the 
inspired  narrative,  was  their  being  sprinkled  by  the  spray 
of  the  sea,  or  by  drops  from  the  miraculous  cloud,  when  it 
passed  over  their  heads. 

The  last  passage  of  the  class  under  consideration  to 
which  I  shall  advert,  is  that  found  in  the  first  Epistle  of 
Peter,  iii.  20,  31 :  "  The  long-suffering  of  God  waited  in 
the  days  of  Noah,  while  the  ark  was  preparing,  wherein 
few,  that  is  eight  souls,  were  saved  by  water.  The  like 
figure  whereunto  even  baptism  doth  also  now  save  us  (not 
the  putting  away  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  answer  of 
a  good  conscience  toward  God)  by  the  resurrection  of  Je- 
sus Christ."  The  principle  implied  in  this  passage  is 
plain  ;  and  it  affbrds  not  the  smallest  countenance  to  the 
doctrine  of  our  Baptist  brethren.  Every  one  sees,  that  in 
the  case  of  Noah  and  his  family,"  and  of  all  the  animals 
preserved  with  them  in  the  ark,  there  was  no  immersion  in 
the  waters  of  the  flood.  Nay,  this  was  the  very  evil  from 
which  the  ark  preserved  them.  Of  course,  whatever  else 
the  passage  may  prove,  it  is  impossible  that  it  should  be 
legitimately  considered  as  favouring  baptism  by  plunging 
the  whole  body  under  water. 

7.  Further ;  that  immersion  is  not  necessary  in  bap- 
tism ;  and  that  to  insist  upon  it,  as  indispensable,  is  super- 
stition, appears  from  the  indisputable  fact,  that  both  the 
significance  and  the  effect  of  baptism  are  to  be  considered 
as  depending,  not  on  the  physical  influence  of  water,  or 
upon  the  quantity  of  it  employed,  but  on  its  symbolical 
meaning,  and  on  the  blessing  of  God  upon  its  application 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  113 

as  a  symbol.  There  has  always  been  a  tendency  in  human 
nature  to  lay  more  stress  than  the  Bible  warrants  upon  out- 
ward forms ;  and  to  imagine  that  external  rites  have  a  vir- 
tue inherent  in  themselves,  by  which  their  recipients  are  of 
course  savingly  benefited.  It  is  generally  granted  by  en- 
lightened Protestants  to  be  one  of  the  mischievous  errors  of 
Popery,  that  baptism,  and  the  other  appointed  rites  of  our 
religion,  when  administered  by  authorized  hands,  have  an 
inherent  efficacy ;  a  sort  of  self-operating  power  on  those 
to  whom  they  are  administered.  This  we  consider  as  a 
superstitious  and  dangerous  error.  We  believe  that  no  exter- 
nal ordinance  has  any  power  in  itself;  but  that  its  power  to 
benefit  those  who  receive  it,  depends  altogether  upon  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  making  it  effectual ; 
and  that  this  influence  may  accompany  or  follow  the  ordi- 
nance, whatever  may  be  the  outward  form  of  its  adminis- 
tration. If,  indeed,  we  had  reason  to  believe  that  the 
benefit  of  baptism  was  caused  by  the  physical  influence  of 
water  on  any  or  every  part  of  the  body,  and  depended 
upon  that  influence :  if  the  least  intimation  of  this  kind 
were  given  us,  either  by  the  Avord  of  God,  or  the  nature  of 
the  case ;  it  would  be  wise  to  insist  on  a  rigorous  adherence 
to  that  form.  But  as  the  benefit  of  the  ordinance  has  no 
connection,  so  far  as  we  knoAv,  with  the  operation  of  water 
on  the  animal  frame ;  but  is  the  result,  solely,  of  a  divine 
blessing  on  a  prescribed  and  striking  emblem ;  and  as  the 
word  of  God  has  no  where  informed  us  of  the  precise 
mode  in  which  that  emblem  shall  be  applied — we  infer  that 
the  divine  blessing  may  attend  upon  any  mode  of  applying 
it.  The  language  of  our  blessed  Saviour,  on  a  memorable 
occasion,  is  full  of  instruction  on  this  subject.  In  order  to 
give  his  disciples  a  striking  lesson  both  of  humility  and 
purity,  he  condescended,  on  a  certain  evening,  when  they 
were  assembled  under  solemn  circumstances,  to  wash  their 
feet.  Simon  Peter,  when  his  Master  came  to  him,  like  too 
many  at  the  present  day,  misunderstanding  the  nature  and 
significance  of  the  symbolical  action,  at  first  strongly  ob- 
jected, and  said,  "  Thou  shalt  never  wash  my  feet."  Jesus 
answered,  "  If  I  wash  thee  not,  thou  hast  no  part  in  me." 
To  which  Peter,  in  the  fulness  of  his  fervent  zeal,  replied, 
"  Lord,  not  my  feet  only,  but  also  ray  hands  and  my  head.** 


114  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

Jesus,  however,  meaning  to  convey  the  idea  that  the  whole 
action  M^as  symbolical,  and  that  the  application  of  water  to 
any  part  of  the  body  was  abmidantly  sufficient,  rejoins  to 
Peter,  "  He  that  is  washed  needeth  not  save  to  wash  his 
feet,  but  is  clean  every  whit:"  as  much  as  to  say,  *'It  is 
not  the  physical  ablution,  but  the  symbolical  meaning,  to 
which  I  now  wish  to  call  your  attention ;  and  for  this  pur- 
pose the  application  of  water  to  the  feet  only,  carries  with 
it  all  the  fulness  of  meaning,  and  all  the  richness  of  benefit, 
that  could  have  resulted  from  the  most  plentiful  application 
of  it  to  the  whole  frame." 

8.  Another,  and  in  my  view,  conclusive  reason  for 
believing  that  our  Baptist  brethren  are  in  error,  in  insisting 
that  no  baptism  unless  by  immersion  is  valid,  is,  that  the 
native  tendency  of  this  doctrine  is  to  superstition  and 
abuse.  The  tendency  here  alleged  has  been  often  observed 
and  lamented  by  serious  people,  as  likely  to  be  connected 
with  a  false  hope,  and  to  destroy  the  souls  of  multitudes. 
Facts  in  support  of  this  remark  have  fallen  under  my  own 
painful  observation.  I  have  known  many  Baptists,  who 
appeared  to  feel  as  if  there  was  some  inherent  efficacy  in 
being  "  buried  under  the  water,"  and  that  those  who  sub- 
mitted to  that  "self-denying"  rite,  were,  of  course,  real 
Christians.  They  have  evidently  appeared  to  think  that 
that  was  the  great  step  in  religion ;  and  that,  having  taken 
it,  all  was  secure.  Now,  I  contend,  that  this  is  the  natural 
tendency  of  the  Baptist  doctrine  ;  that  their  laying  so  much 
stress  upon  "  going  under  the  water,"  and  holding  it  up, 
with  unceasing  zeal,  to  the  popular  view,  as  the  great,  dis- 
tinguishing, and  indispensable  badge  of  discipleship,  is, 
unavoidably,  adapted  to  betray  "unwary  souls"  into  a  de- 
lusive confidence.  There  is  no  disposition  in  depraved 
human  nature  more  deeply  inwrought,  or  more  incessantly 
operative,  than  the  disposition  to  rely  upon  something  done 
by  us  for  securing  the  divine  favour.  It  is  this  disposition 
which  has  led  to  all  that  enormous  mass  of  superstitious 
observances,  which  distinguishes  the  Pa,pal  system,  and 
which  we  have  every  reason  to  believe  is  built  upon  by 
millions,  as  the  foundation  of  hope,  instead  of  Christ. 
Whenever,  therefore,  any  external  rite  becomes  the  grand 
distinction  of  a  sect,  and  the  object  of  something  approach- 


SEftMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  115 

ing  to  sectarian  idolatry,  we  may  be  sure  there  exists  not 
only  the  danger,  but  the  actual  commencement,  to  some  ex- 
tent, of  that  superstitious  reliance,  which  he  who  has  not 
learned  to  fear,  "  knows  nothing  of  the  human  heart  yet  as 
he  ought  to  know." 

That  this  suggestion  has  something  more  than  mere 
fancy  on  which  to  rest,  is  evident  from  facts  of  recent  and  ' 
most  mournful  occurrence.  A  large  and  daily  increasing 
sect  has  arisen,  within  a  few  years,  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Baptist  denomination,  which  maintains  the  delusive  and 
destructive  doctrine,  that  baptism  is  regeneration ;  that  no 
man  can  be  regenerated  who  is  not  immersed  ;  and  that  all, 
without  exception,  who  have  a  historical  faith,  and  are  im- 
mersed, are,  of  course,  in  a  state  of  salvation.  This  per- 
nicious heresy,  so  contrary  to  the  plainest  principles  and 
facts  of  the  word  of  God,  and  so  manifestly  adapted  to 
destroy  the  souls  of  all  who  believe  it,  has  been  propagated 
to  a  melancholy  extent,  by  a  plausible,  reckless,  and  im- 
pious demagogue,  and  is  supposed  to  embrace  one  half  of 
the  Baptist  body  in  the  western  country,  besides  many  in 
the  east.  In  short,  the  Baptist  churches,  in  large  districts 
of  country,  are  so  rent  in  pieces,  and  deluded  by  the  mise- 
rable impostor  referred  to,  that  their  prospects,  for  many 
years  to  come,  are  not  only  gloomy,  but,  \7it'hout  a  special 
interposition  of  the  King  of  Zion  in  their  f:ivour,  altogether 
desperate. 

Now  I  maintain  that  this  wretched  delusion  is  by  no 
means  an  unnatural  result  of  the  doctrine  and  practice  of 
our  Baptist  brethren,  in  regard  to  the  baptismal  rite.  Mul- 
titudes of  them,  I  know,  reject  and  abhor  the  heresy  in 
question  as  much  as  any  of  us.  But  have  they  duly  con- 
sidered, that  it  seems  naturally  to  have  grown  out  of  their 
own  theory  and  practice  in  regard  to  baptism  ;  their  attach- 
ing such  a  disproportioned  importance  to  the  mode  of  ad- 
ministering that  ordinance  ;  often,  very  often,  directing  the 
attention  of  the  people  more  to  the  river  than  the  cross  ;  ex- 
cluding all  from  Christian  communion,  hoAvever  pious,  who 
have  not  been  immersed ;  and  making  representations 
which,  whether  so  intended  or  not,  naturally  lead  the  weak 
and  the  uninformed  to  consider  immersion  as  a  kind  of 
talisman,  always  connected  with  a  saving  blessing  ?    This^ 


116  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

I  sincerely  believe,  is  the  native  tendency  of  the  doctrine 
of  our  Baptist  brethren,  although  they,  I  am  equally  confi- 
dent, neither  perceive  nor  admit  this  to  be  the  case.  If 
pious  Christians  who  have  not  been  immersed,  cannot  be 
admitted  to  communion  in  the  church  below,  there  would 
seem  to  be  still  more  reason  for  excluding  them  from  the 
purer  church  above.  And  so  far  as  this  principle  is  received 
and  cherished,  though  far  from  being  alike  mischievous  in 
all  cases,  it  can  scarcely  fail  of  predisposing  many  minds 
in  favour  of  that  awful  delusion,  by  which  we  have  reason 
to  believe  that  not  a  few,  under  its  higher  workings,  have 
been  blinded,  betrayed,  and  lost. 

9.  Finally;  that  immersion  cannot  be  considered,  to 
say  the  least,  as  essential  to  a  valid  baptism,  is  plain  from 
the  history  of  this  ordinance. 

It  is  not  denied  that,  for  the  first  few  centuries  after 
Christ,  the  most  common  mode  of  administering  baptism 
was  by  immersion.  But  it  is  maintained,  that  affusion  and 
sprinkling  were  also  practised,  and  when  used,  were  consi- 
dered as  perfectly  valid  and  sufficient.  Of  this  the  proof 
is  so  complete  and  indubitable,  that  no  one  really  acquainted 
with  the  early  history  of  the  church,  will  think,  for  a  moment, 
of  calling  it  in  question.  The  learned  TVall,  whose  "  His- 
tory of  Infant  Baptism"  is  generally  considered,  by  com- 
petent judges,  as  one  of  the  most  profound  and  faithful 
works  extant,  on  the  subject  before  us  ;  after  showing  con- 
clusively that  Pcedobaptists  ought  not  to  refuse  the  admis- 
sion, that  baptism  ^^y  dipping,  was  the  most  prevalent  mode, 
even  in  the  western  church,  for  a  number  of  centuries  after 
Christ;  goes  on  to  remark  that,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
Antipoedobaptists  will  be  quite  as  unfair  in  their  turn,  if 
they  do  not  grant,  that  in  cases  of  sickness,  weakliness, 
haste,  want  of  a  sufficient  quantity  of  water,  or  any  such 
extraordinary  occasion,  baptism  by  the  affusion  of  water 
on  the  face,  was,  by  the  ancients,  counted  sufficient  bap- 
tism. Of  the  testimony  which  he  offers  in  support  of  this 
statement,  a  specimen  will  be  presented.* 

Eusebius  states,  (Book  6.  chapter  43.)  on  the  authority 
of  preceding  writers,  that  Novatian  being  sick,  and  near 

»  Wall^  Part  IL  chapter  ix.p.  352,  «&c. 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  117 

death,  as  was  supposed,  was  baptized  on  his  bed  by  affu- 
sion. He,  however,  recovered,  and  was  afterwards  ordained 
to  the  work  of  the  ministry.  And  although  some  questioned, 
whether  a  man  who  had  been  brought  to  make  a  profession 
of  religion  only  on  a  sick  bed,  and  when  he  considered  him- 
self as  about  to  die,  ought  to  be  made  a  minister  ;  yet  this 
doubt  arose,  we  are  assured,  not  from  any  apprehension 
that  the  baptism  itself  was  incomplete  ;  but  on  the  princi- 
ple, that  he  who  came  to  the  faith  not  voluntarily,  but  from 
necessity,  ought  not  to  be  made  a  priest,  unless  his  subse- 
quent diligence  and  faith  should  be  distinguished  and  highly 
commendable. 

Of  the  character  of  Cyprian,  who  flourished  in  the  for^ 
mer  part  of  the  third  century,  enough  has  been  said  in  a 
preceding  discourse.  A  certain  Magnus,  a  country  minis- 
ter, consulted  him  on  the  question,  whether  those  who 
had  been  introduced  into  the  Christian  church,  by  baptism, 
on  their  sick  beds,  and,  of  course,  by  affusion,  or  sprink- 
ling, ought  to  be  baptized  again,  if  they  recovered  ?  Cy- 
prian's answer  to  this  question  is  as  follows : 

"  You  inquire,  my  dear  son,  what  I  think  of  such  as  at- 
tain grace  in  time  of  sickness  and  infirmity :  whether  they 
are  to  be  accounted  lawful  Christians,  because  they  have 
not  been  ivashed  all  over  with  the  water  of  salvation,  but 
have  only  had  some  of  it  poured  on  them.  In  which  mat- 
ter I  would  use  so  much  modesty  and  humility,  as  not  to 
prescribe  so  positively,  but  that  every  one  should  enjoy  the 
freedom  of  his  own  thought,  and  do  as  he  thinks  best. 
I  do,  however,  according  to  the  best  of  my  mean  capacity, 
judge  thus  :  That  the  divine  favours  can  in  no  wise  be  mu- 
tilated or  weakened,  so  that  any  thing  less  than  the  whole 
of  them  is  conveyed,  where  the  benefit  of  them  is  received 
with  a  full  and  complete  faith,  on  the  part  both  of  the  giver 
and  receiver.  For,  in  the  sacrament  of  salvation,  the  con- 
tagion of  sin  is  not  washed  off  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
filth  of  the  body  is  in  a  carnal  and  secular  bath.  It  is  en- 
tirely in  a  different  way  that  the  heart  of  a  believer — it  is 
after  another  fashion  that  the  mind  of  man  is  by  faith 
cleansed.  In  the  sacraments  of  salvation,  through  the  in- 
dulgence of  God,  when  necessity  compels,  the  shortest 
way  of   transacting  divine  matters,  conveys  the  whole 


lis  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

benefit  to  those  who  believe.  Nor  let  any  be  moved  by  the 
fact,  that  the  sick,  when  they  are  baptized,  are  only  per- 
fused or  sprinkled,  since  the  Scripture  says,  by  the  prophet 
Ezekiel,  (chapter  xxxvi.  25.  36.)  "I  will  sprinkle  clean 
water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean ;  from  all  your  filthi- 
ness  and  from  all  your  idols  will  I  cleanse  you;  a  new 
heart  also  will  I  give  you,  and  a  new  spirit  will  I  put  within 
you."  It  is  also  said  in  the  book  of  Numbers,  (chap,  xix.) 
"  And  the  man  which  shall  be  unclean  until  the  evening, 
shall  be  purified  on  the  third  day,  and  on  the  seventh  day, 
and  he  shall  be  clean.  But  if  he  shall  not  be  purified  on 
the  third  day,  and  on  the  seventh  day,  he  shall  not  be  clean, 
and  that  soul  shall  be  cut  oflf  from  Israel,  because  the  water 
of  aspersion  hath  not  been  sprinkled  upon  him."  And 
again,  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses,  in  the  book  of  Numbers, 
(chap,  viii.)  "  Take  the  Levites  from  among  the  children 
of  Israel,  and  cleanse  them ;  and  thus  shalt  thou  do  unto 
them  to  cleanse  them ;  sprinkle  water  of  purifying  upon 
them."  And  again,  "  the  water  of  aspersion  is  purifica- 
tion." From  which  it  appears  that  sprinkling  is  sufficient 
instead  of  immersion  ;  and  whensoever  it  is  done,  if  there 
be  a  sound  faith,  on  the  part  both  of  the  giver  and  receiver, 
it  is  perfect  and  complete." 

From  these  passages,  as  well  as  from  a  number  of 
others,  which  might  be  quoted,  found  in  the  works  of  Cy- 
prian, it  is  evident,  that,  in  a  little  more  than  one  hundred 
and  fifty  years  from  the  death  of  the  last  apostle,  cases  of 
baptism  by  perfusion  or  sprinkling  had  notoriously,  and  in 
repeated  instances,  occurred;  that  such  examples  were 
found  among  the  heretics,  as  well  as  in  the  orthodox 
church ;  that  a  man  so  learned  and  pious  as  the  venerable 
Cyprian,  was  decisively  of  the  opinion  that  they  were  to 
be  justified ;  and,  finally,  that  he  considered  this  as  a  point 
concerning  which  Christians  were  at  liberty  to  entertain 
their  own  opinion,  and  to  do  as  they  judged  best.  Plainly 
implying  that  he  did  not  consider  it  at  all  as  an  essential 
matter. 

Origen  was  contemporary  with  Cyprian.  He  wrote  in 
the  Greek  language.  It  was  his  vernacular  tongue  ;  and  he 
was,  probably,  the  most  learned  man  of  the  century  in 
which  he  lived.     This  venerable  Christian  father,  com-^ 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 


119 


menting  on  1  Kings,  xviii.  33,  in  which  we  read  of  Eli- 
jah's ordering  water  to  be  poured  on  the  burnt  sacrifice, 
tells  us  that  he  baptized  the  wood  on  the  altar.  Was  not 
Origen  a  good  judge  of  the  meaning  of  a  Greek  word? 
Can  we  imagine  that  he  would  have  used  the  word  baptize 
in  this  sense,  if  he  had  regarded  immersion  as  its  exclusive 
meaning  ? 

When  Laurentius,  a  Roman  deacon,  about  the  middle  of 
the  third  century,  was  brought  to  the  stake  to  suffer  martyr- 
dom, a  soldier  who  had  been  employed  to  be  one  of  his 
executioners,  professed  to  be  converted,  and  requested  bap- 
tism from  the  hands  of  him  whom  he  had  been  engaged  to 
assist  in  burning.  For  this  purpose  d,  pitcher  of  water  was 
brought,  and  the  soldier  baptized  at  the  place  of  exe- 
cution.* In  circumstances  so  solemn  as  these,  surely  no 
conscientious  man  would  have  sported  with  a  divine  ordi- 
nance, or  subjected  it  to  any  essential  mutilation.  It  was, 
doubtless,  deemed  a  sufficient  mode  of  administermg  bap- 
tism. 

Gennadius,  a  distinguished  ecclesiastic  of  Marseilles,  in 
the  fifth  century,  speaks  of  baptism  as  administered  in  the 
French  church  indifferently,  by  either  immersion  or  affu- 
sion, or  sprinkling.  For  having  said,  "  We  believe  the 
way  of  salvation  to  be  open  only  to  baptized  persons  ";  he 
adds,  "except  only  in  the  case  of  martyrdom,  in  which  all 
the  sacraments  of  baptism  are  completed."  Then,  to  show 
how  martyrdom  has  all  in  it  that  baptism  has,  he  says, 
"  The  person  to  be  baptized,  owns  his  faith  before  the 
priest;  and  when  the  interrogatories  are  put  to  him,  makes 
his  answer.  The  same  does  a  martyr  before  the  heathen 
judge.  He  also  owns  his  faith ;  and  when  the  question  is 
put  to  him,  makes  answer.  The  one,  after  his  confession, 
is  either  wetted  with  the  water,  or  else  plunged  into  it ;  and 
the  other,  is  either  wetted  with  his  own  blood,  or  plunged 
into  the  fire."  This  language  plainly  evinces  that,  in  the 
time  of  Gennadius,  both  modes  of  baptism  were  in  use 
and  deemed  equally  valid. 

Thomas  Aquinas,  and  Bonaventura,  are  well  known  as  two 
learned  ecclesiastics  of  the  twelfth  century.   In  their  time  it 

*  Walfridius  Strabo,  De  Rebus  Ecclesiast.  as  quoted  by  Wall. 


120  SERMONS    ON    BAPTISM. 

is  evident  that  both  plunging  and  affusion  were  used  in  the 
churches  of  Italy,  in  the  administration  of  baptism.  Aqui- 
nas, in  writing  on  the  subject,  expresses  himself  thus : 
"  Baptism  may  be  given  not  only  by  immersion,  but  also  by 
affusion  of  water,  or  by  sprinkling  with  it.  But  it  is  the  safer 
way  to  baptize  by  immersion,  because  that  is  the  most 
common  custom."  On  the  other  hand,  his  contemporary, 
Bonaventura,  observes,  "  The  way  of  affusion  in  baptism 
was  probably  used  by  the  apostles,  and  was,  in  his  time, 
used  in  the  churches  of  France,  and  some  others  ;"  but  re- 
marks, "  The  method  of  dipping  into  the  water  is  the  more 
common,  and  therefore  the  fitter  and  safer." 

The  Synod  of  Angiers,  A.  D.  1275,  speaks  of  dipping 
and  pouring  as  indifferently  used ;  and  blames  some  igno- 
rant priests,  because  they  dipped,  or  poured  on  water,  but 
once ;  and  at  the  same  time  declaring  that  the  general  cus- 
tom of  the  church  was  to  dip,  or  to  pour  on  water  three 
times.  The  Synod  of  Langres,  A.  D.  1404,  speaks  of 
pouring  or  perfusion  only.  "  Let  the  priest  make  three 
pourings  or  sprinklings  of  water  on  the  infanfs  head,"  &c. 
The  Council  of  Cologne,  in  1536,  evidently  intimate  that 
both  modes  were  constantly  practised.  Their  language  is, 
*'  The  child  is  thrice  either  dipped,  or  ivetted  with  water." 
Fifteen  years  afterwards,  in  the  Agenda  of  the  church  of 
Mentz,  published  by  Sebastian,  there  is  found  the  follow- 
ing direction :  "  Then  let  the  priest  take  the  child  on  his 
left  arm,  and  holding  him  over  the  font,  let  him,  with  his 
right  hand,  three  several  times,  take  water  out  of  the  font, 
and  pour  it  on  the  child's  head,  so  that  the  water  may  wet 
its  head  and  shoulders."  Then  they  give  a  note  to  this 
purpose  ;  that  immersion,  once  or  thrice,  or  pouring  of 
water  may  be  used,  and  have  been  used,  in  the  church ; 
that  this  variety  does  not  alter  the  nature  of  baptism  ;  and 
that  a  man  would  do  ill  to  break  the  custom  of  the  church 
for  either  of  them.  But  they  add,  that  it  is  better,  if  the 
church  will  allow,  to  use  pouring  on  of  water.  "  For  sup- 
pose," say  they,  "  the  priest  be  old  and  feeble,  or  have  the 
palsy  in  his  hands ;  or  the  weather  be  very  cold ;  or  the 
child  be  very  infirm  ;  or  too  big  to  be  dipped  in  the  font ; 
then  it  is  much  fitter  to  use  affusion  of  the  water."  Then 
they  bring  the  instance  of  the  apostles  baptizing  three  thou- 


SERMONS    ON   BAPTISM.  121 

smid  at  a  time  ;  and  the  instance  of  Laurentius,  the  Roman 
deacon,  before  spoken  of — and  add,  "  That,  therefore,  there 
may  not  be  one  way  for  the  sick,  and  another  for  the 
healthy  ;  one  for  children,  and  another  for  bigger  persons  ; 
it  is  better  that  the  administrator  of  this  sacrament  do  ob- 
serve the  safest  way,  which  is,  to  pour  water  thrice ;  un- 
less the  custom  be  to  the  contrary."* 

One  more  historical  record,  which,  though  apparently 
inconsiderable  in  itself,  is,  in  my  view,  decisive,'shall  close 
the  present  list  of  testimonies.  It  is  one  referred  to  in  a 
former  discourse,  when  speaking  of  Infant  baptism.  I 
mean  the  undoubted  fact,  that  the  Waldenses,  those  far- 
famed  and  devoted  witnesses  of  the  truth,  who  maintained, 
during  the  darkness  and  desolation  of  the  Papacy,  "  the 
testimony  of  Jesus,"  very  soon  after  the  Reformation 
opened,  approached,  with  the  most  cordial  friendliness,  the 
Reformed  churches  of  Geneva  and  France ;  recognised 
them  as  sisters  in  the  Lord  ;  received  ministers  from  them  ; 
and  maintained  with  them  the  most  affectionate  communion. 
Now  it  is  certain  that,  at  that  time,  in  the  churches  of  both 
Geneva  and  France,  the  baptism  of  infants,  and  the  admi- 
nistration of  the  ordinance  by  sprinkling,  were  in  constant 
use.  On  such  an  incontestible  fact,  the  argument  is  this : 
The  Waldenses  either  baptized  by  sprinkling  or  by  immer- 
sion. If  by  sprinkling,  an  important  testimony  is  gained 
in  favour  of  that  mode,  from  ecclesiastical  history.  If  by 
immersion,  they  plainly  laid  no  such  stress  upon  the  mode 
as  our  Baptist  brethren  now  do ;  since  they  were  willing 
to  commune  with,  and  to  receive  ministers  from,  churches 
which  were  in  the  habit  of  using  sprinkling  only.  In  my 
view,  as  I  said,  this  argument  is  decisive.  We  know  that 
the  Waldenses  habitually  baptized  infants;  but  in  what 
mode  they  administered  the  ordinance  is  not  quite  so  cer- 
tain. But  one  thing  is  unquestionable ;  and  that  is,  that 
those  pious  witnesses  for  Christ,  even  if  they  did  immerse, 
did  not  consider  the  mode  as  essential,  but  were  ready  to 
hold  the  most  unreserved  communion  with  those  who  prac- 
tised aspersion. 

These  testimonies,  and  many  more  to  the  same  purpose, 

*  Wall,  Part  II.  chapter  ix.  p.  360,  361. 


122  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

which  might  be  presented  if  it  were  necessary,  must,  it 
appears  to  me,  satisfy  every  impartial  mind,  that,  from  the 
days  of  the  apostles,  down  to  the  Reformation,  affusion 
and  sprinkling  in  baptism,  as  well  as  immersion,  have  been 
in  constant  use ;  that  some  of  the  gravest  and  most  sober- 
minded  writers  have  firmly  defended  the  two  former,  as 
well  as  the  latter ;  that  the  strong  arguments  in  favour  of 
affusion  or  sprinkling,  as  the  preferable  mode,  have  been, 
in  all  ages,  distinctly  appreciated;  and  that  it  has  ever  been 
considered  as  a  part  of  Christian  liberty  to  use  either 
mode,  as  may  be  conscientiously  preferred. 

Suffer  me  now  to  close  this  discussion  by  presenting  two 
or  three  practical  inferences  from  the  view  which  has  been 
given  of  this  latter  part  of  the  subject.     And, 

1.  If  our  statement  of  evidence  as  to  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism be  correct,  then  the  conduct  of  our  Baptist  brethren, 
in  not  only  denying  to  the  infant  seed  of  believers  all  right 
to  membership  in  the  church,  but  also  making  immersion 
indispensable  to  a  valid  baptism,  are  chargeable  with 
taking  ground  w^hich  is  plainly  unscriptural,  and  with 
dividing  the  body  of  Christ,  for  a  mere  uncommanded  cir- 
cumstance ;  a  circumstance  in  regard  to  which  all  reason- 
ing, and  all  history  are,  on  the  whole,  against  them.  We 
do  not  deny  that  the  baptisms  of  these  brethren  are  valid ; 
but  we  do  deny  that  they  rest  upon  any  more  solid  ground 
than  ours ;  and  we  are  persuaded  that,  without  the  least 
authority,  they  lay  on  the  recipients  of  baptism  "  a  yoke  of 
bondage,"  which  has  no  warrant  from  the  Word  of  God ; 
and  which  the  whole  genius  of  the  Gospel  forbids.  Surely, 
if  the  inspired  writers  had  regarded  immersion  in  the  same 
light  with  our  Baptist  brethren,  we  should  have  had  some 
explicit  statements  on  this  subject  in  the  instructions  given 
to  the  churches  in  the  infancy  of  their  New  Testament 
course.  And,  surely,  the  attempt  to  lay  burdens  which  the 
Spirit  of  God  has  no  where  authorized,  is  to  incur  the 
guilt  imputed  to  those  who  "add  to"  the  things  which  are 
contained  in  the  book  of  life.  On  this  subject  I  feel  that 
it  is  no  longer  our  duty  to  content  ourselves  with  standing 
on  the  defensive.  Our  opponents  in  this  controversy,  I 
verily  believe,  are  chargeable  with  "  teaching  for  doctrines 
the  commandments  of  men ;"  and,  of  course,  I  consider 


SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM.  123 

them  as  equally  sinning  against  the  Head  of  the  church, 
and  against  "  the  generation  of  the  righteous." 

2.  These  things  being  so,  we  may  see  how  the  conduct 
of  some  of  our  Baptist  brethren,  in  particular  states  of  the 
church,  ought  to  be  regarded  by  the  friends  of  Zion.  The 
conduct  to  which  I  refer  is,  their  having  so  often  intruded 
into  churches  in  which  some  religious  attention  has  existed, 
and  in  which  scarcely  a  family  of  their  own  denomination 
was  to  be  found ;  and  when  the  minds  of  many  individuals 
were  anxious  respecting  their  eternal  interest,  immediately 
broaching  the  controversy  respecting  infant  baptism,  and 
immersion,  and  distressing  the  consciences  of  serious 
inquirers — not  with  the  great  and  momentous  question, 
*'  what  they  shall  do  to  be  saved  ?"  but — before  their  minds 
are  at  all  settled  as  to  their  personal  hope  in  Christ,  or  their 
fitness  for  any  sacramental  seal ;  perplexing  them  with  the 
controversy  about  an  external  rite,  which  they  themselves 
grant  is  not  essential  to  salvation.  I  have  personally  known 
such  proceedings  to  occur,  with  a  frequency  as  wonderful 
as  it  was  revolting ;  and  with  an  obtrusive  zeal  worthy  of 
a  better  cause.  Young  and  timid  consciences  have  been 
distressed,  if  not  with  the  direct  assertion,  at  least  by  the 
artful  insinuation,  that  their  particular  mode  of  baptism  was 
all  in  all ;  that  there  could  be  no  safe  Christianity  without 
it.  Tlie  river,  the  river,  really  seemed,  by  some,  to  be 
placed  in  the  room  of  the  Saviour ! 

There  is  something  in  all  this  so  deeply  offensive  to 
every  enlightened  and  judicious  Christian  ;  which  involves 
so  much  meanness ;  and  which  manifests  so  much  more 
concern  for  the  enlargement  of  a  sect,  than  the  salvation  of 
souls,  that  it  is  difficult  to  speak  of  it  in  terms  of  as  strong 
reprobation  as  it  deserves,  without  infringing  on  the  limits 
of  Christian  decorum  and  respectfulness.  It  is  conduct  of 
which  no  candid  and  generous  mind,  actuated  by  the  spirit 
of  Christ,  will  ever  be  guilty.  And,  I  am  happy  to  add, 
it  is  conduct  in  which  many  belonging  to  the  denomination 
to  which  I  allude,  have  souls  too  enlarged  and  elevated 
to  allow  themselves  to  indulge. 

3.  Once  more ;  let  us  all  be  careful,  my  Christian 
friends,  as  a  practical  deduction  from  what  has  been  said, 
to  forbear  "  returning  evil  for  evil,"  on  this,  or  any  other 


124  SERMONS  ON  BAPTISM. 

point  of  ecclesiastical  controversy.  However  other  deno- 
minations may  treat  usj  let  us  never  be  chargeable  with 
treating  them  in  an  unchristian  manner.  We  are  conscien- 
tiously compelled  to  differ  from  our  Baptist  brethren.  We 
believe  them  to  be  in  error ;  in  important  and  highly  mis- 
chievous error.  But  what  then  ?  They  are  still  brethren 
in  Christ.  Let  us,  therefore,  love  them,  and,  however  they 
may  treat  us,  treat  them  with  fraternal  respectfulness,  and 
seek  their  welfare.  Let  us  never  indulge  a  spirit  of  unhal- 
lowed proselytism.  Let  us  never  employ  any  other  wea- 
pons against  them  than  those  of  candid  argument,  and  fer- 
vent prayer.  Instead  of  "  doting  about  questions,  and 
strifes  of  words,  whereof  come  envy,  railings,  evil  surmis- 
ings,  and  corrupt  dispu tings  ;"  let  us  follow  after  patience, 
forbearance  and  charity;  ever  remembering  that  all  who 
really  belong  to  Christ,  however  they  may  differ  in  externals, 
are  "  one  body  in  Him,  and  members  one  of  another." 
May  we  all  be  deeply  imbued  with  the  spirit  which  ought 
to  flow  from  this  precious  truth ;  and  may  all  that  we  do 
be  done  with  charity !     Amen  ! 


ADDITIONAL  NOTES. 


(Note  A.) 

Giving  a  Name  in  baptism. 

In  administering  the  rite  of  circumcision,  it  was  cus- 
tomary to  give  a  name  to  the  child.  This  is  evident  from 
the  circumstances  attending  the  circumcision  of  John  the 
Baptist,  as  related  in  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke,  i.  59- 
64  ;  and  also  those  attending  the  circumcision  of  our  blessed 
Saviour,  as  found  recorded  in  the  next  chapter  of  the  same 
Gospel.  The  same  practice  probably  existed,  from  the 
earliest  period  of  the  New  Testament  church,  in  the  admi- 
nistration of  baptism.  It  makes,  however,  no  necessary, 
or  even  important,  part  of  the  rite.  A  baptism  adminis- 
tered without  a  name,  would,  of  course,  be  just  as  valid  as 
if  one  were  announced.  And  there  is  nothing  in  the  es- 
sential nature  of  the  case,  which  would  forbid  a  name  given 
to  a  child  in  baptism  being  reconsidered  and  altered  after- 
wards. Yet,  inasmuch  as  a  child,  when  baptized,  is 
announced  to  the  church  as  a  new  member,  subject  to  its 
maternal  watch  and  care,  it  ought,  in  common,  for  obvious 
reasons,  to  be  introduced  and  known  under  some  name,  so 
that  each  child  may  be  distinguished,  and  may  receive  its 
appropriate  treatment.  To  introduce  a  nameless  member 
into  any  society,  would  be  both  unreasonable  and  inconve- 
nient. Moreover,  it  is  of  great  consequence,  both  to  civil 
and  religious  society,  that  the  birth  and  baptism  of  every 
child  be  recorded  in  regular  church  books.  The  formation 
of  this  record  requires,  it  is  evident,  the  use  of  a  name; 
and  after  the  name  is  adopted  and  recorded  in  this  public 
register,  it  is  plain  that  frequent  alterations  of  the  name, 
and  tampering,  in  a  corresponding  manner,  with  the  public 

L* 


126  ADDITIONAL    NOTES. 

register,  would  lead  to  endless  confusion  and  mischief. 
Thus  we  are  conducted,  by  a  very  obvious  train  of  reason- 
ing, to  the  conclusion  that  the  name  announced  in  baptism, 
ought,  in  general,  to  be  carefully  retained,  without  subtrac- 
tion or  addition.  Sometimes,  indeed,  the  civil  law  requires 
such  registers  to  be  made  and  preserved,  in  regard  to  every 
birth  and  baptism.  "Where  this  is  the  case,  there  is,  evi- 
dently, an  additional  reason  for  adhering  strictly  to  the 
name  announced  in  baptism,  recorded  in  the  appropriate 
register,  and  thus  brought  under  official  notice,  and  recorded 
as  the  property  of  the  state.  See  a  number  of  curious 
questions  proposed  and  resolved,  concerning  the  names  im- 
posed in  baptism,  in  the  Politics^  Ecclesiasticse  of  the 
learned  Gisbertus  Voetius.  Tom.  I.  p.  714-724. 


(Note  B.) 
Baptismal  Regeneration. 

This  unscriptural  and  pernicious  doctrine  is  not  confined 
to  the  Roman  Catholics,  in  whose  system  it  may  without 
impropriety  be  said  to  be  indigenous  ;  but  is  also  frequently 
found  in  the  pulpits  and  the  manuals  of  some  Protestants^ 
in  the  midst  of  whose  general  principles,  it  ought  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  poisonous  exotic. 

I.  The  doctrine  referred  to,  as  held  by  some  Protestants, 
in  its  most  objectionable  form,  appears  to  be  this : — that 
the  spiritual  change  which  the  Scriptures  designate  by  the 
term  regeneration,  is  always  attendant  upon,  and  effected 
by,  the  rite  of  baptism,  when  duly  administered ;  that,  on 
the  one  hand,  every  person,  infant  or  adult,  who  has  been 
baptized  by  an  authorized  minister,  is  a  regenerated  person ; 
and  that,  on  the  other,  every  person  who  has  not  been  bap- 
tized, however  deep  or  mature  his  penitence  and  faith,  is 
still  unregenerate.  In  short,  the  position  is,  that  the  inward 
grace  of  regeneration  always  accompanies  the  outward 
sign  of  baptism ;  that  they  are  inseparable ;  that  the  one 
cannot  exist  without  the  other ;  that  he  who  has  been  thus 
regenerated,  if  he  die  without  falling  from  grace,  is  cer- 


ADDITIONAL    NOTES.  12*7 

tainly  saved;  that  baptism  is  essential  to  salvation;  and 
that  to  call  by  the  name  of  regeneration  any  moral  change, 
from  the  love  of  sin  to  the  love  of  holiness,  which  takes 
place  either  before  or  after  baptism,  is  unscriptural  and  ab- 
surd. This,  as  I  understand  them,  is  the  doctrine  main- 
tained by  Bishop  Tomline,  Bishop  Marsh,  Bishop  Mant, 
and  a  number  of  other  writers,  of  equal  conspicuity,  in  the 
church  of  England,  and  by  not  a  few  divines  of  the  Pro- 
testant Episcopal  church  in  our  own  country. 

This  doctrine,  I  apprehend,  is  contrary  to  Scripture ; 
contrary  to  experience ;  contrary  to  the  declared  opinion  of 
the  most  wise,  pious,  and  venerated  divines  even  of  the 
Episcopal  denomination ;  and  adapted  to  generate  the  most 
dangerous  errors  with  regard  to  Christian  character,  and 
the  Gospel  plan  of  salvation. 

1.  It  is  contrary  to  Scripture.  AVithout  regeneration, 
the  Scriptures  declare,  it  is  impossible  to  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  But  the  penitent  malefactor  on  the 
cross  undoubtedly  entered  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  if 
we  are  to  credit  our  Lord's  express  declaration.  Yet  this 
penitent,  believing  malefactor  was  never  baptized,  therefore 
he  was  regenerated  without  baptism  ;  and,  of  course,  rege- 
neration  and  baptism  are  not  inseparably  connected.  Again ; 
Simon  Magus  received  the  outward  and  visible  ordinance 
of  baptism,  with  unquestionable  regularity,  by  an  author- 
ized administrator ;  yet  who  will  venture  to  say,  that  he 
received  the  "  inward  and  invisible  grace"  signified  and  re- 
presented in  that  ordinance  ?  He  was  evidently  from  the 
beginning  a  hypocrite,  and  remained,  after  baptism,  as  be- 
fore "  in  the  gall  of  bitterness  and  in  the  bond  of  iniquity.*' 
Therefore  the  outward  and  sensible  sign,  and  the  inward 
and  invisible  grace  are  not  in  all  cases,  or  iiecessarily,  con- 
nected. Again  ;  it  is  evident  that  the  apostle  Paul,  Lydia, 
the  Ethiopian  Eunuch,  the  Philippian  Jailor,  (fee.  "  be- 
lieved with  the  heart,"  and  were,  consequently,  brought 
into  a  state  of  acceptance  with  God  before  they  were  bap- 
tized. But  we  are  told  (John  i.  12,  13.)  that  as  many  as 
believe  have  been  "  born  of  God,"  and  made  the  "  sons  of 
God."  Of  course,  regeneration  may  take  place,  in  the 
case  of  adults,  ought  to  take  place,  and  in  these  cases,  did 
take  place,  before  baptism  ;  and,  consequently,  is  not  th^ 


128  ADDITIONAL    NOTES. 

same  thing  with  baptism,  or  inseparably  connected  with 
that  rite.  Once  more  ;  we  are  assured  in  Scripture,  that 
"  he  who  is  born  of  God,  or  regenerated,  doth  not  commit 
sin,  (that  is,  deliberately  or  habitually,)  for  his  seed  re- 
maineth  in  him,  and  he  cannot  sin,  because  he  is  born  of 
God  ;"  and  farther,  that  "  every  one  that  loveth  is  '  born  of 
God'  and  knoweth  God;"  and  that  "  whosoever  believeth 
that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  is  born  of  God."  But  can  it  be 
said  that  this  character  belongs  to  all  who  are  baptized? 
Or,  that  none  who  are  unbaptized  manifest  that  they  possess 
it  ?  Surely  no  one  in  his  senses  will  venture  to  make  the 
assertion.  Therefore  a  man  may  be  "  born  of  God"  before 
he  is  baptized,  and,  consequently,  the  administration  of  the 
outward  ordinance,  and  that  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
called  in  the  word  of  God  regeneration,  are  not  always 
connected. 

2.  The  doctrine  before  us  is  as  contrary  to  experience  as 
it  is  to  Scripture.  "  It  is  asserted,"  says  an  eminent 
divine  of  the  church  of  England,  now  living — "  It  is  as- 
serted, that  the  spiritual  change  of  heart  called  regenera- 
tion invariably  takes  place  in  the  precise  article  of  baptism. 
If  this  assertion  be  well  founded,  the  spiritual  change  in 
question  will  invariably  take  place  in  every  adult  at  the 
identical  moment  when  he  is  baptized ;  that  is  to  say,  at 
the  very  instant  when  the  hand  of  the  priest  brings  his 
body  in  contact  with  the  baptismal  water ;  at  that  precise 
instant,  his  understanding  begins  to  be  illuminated,  his  will 
to  be  reformed,  and  his  affections  to  be  purified.  Hitherto 
he  has  walked  in  darkness  ;  but  now,  to  use  the  scriptural 
phrase,  he  has  passed  from  darkness  to  light.  Hitherto  he 
has  been  wrapped  in  a  death-like  sleep  of  trespasses  and 
sins  ;  but  now  he  awakes,  and  rises  from  the  dead,  Christ 
himself  giving  him  life.  Hitherto  he  has  been  a  chaos  of 
vice,  and  ignorance,  and  spiritual  confusion ;  the  natural 
man  receiving  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  for  they 
are  foolishness  unto  him :  but  now  he  is  created  after  God 
in  righteousness  and  true  holiness ;  being  in  Christ  he  is 
a  '  new  creature  ;'  having  become  spiritual,  the  things  of 
the  Spirit  of  God  are  no  longer  foolishness  to  him;  he 
knows  them  because  they  are  spiritually  discerned.  Such 
are  the  emphatic  terms  in  which  regeneration  is  described 


ADDITIONAL    NOTES.  l29 

by  the  inspired  writers.  What  we  have  to  do,  therefore, 
I  apprehend,  is  forthwith  to  inquire,  whether  every  bap- 
tized adult,  without  a  single  exception,  is  invariably  found 
to  declare,  that,  in  the  precise  article  of  baptism,  his  soul 
experienced  a  change  analogous  to  that  which  is  so  unequi- 
vocally set  forth  in  the  above-mentioned  texts  of  Scripture."* 
We  need  not  dwell  long  on  the  inquiry.  The  fact  is  noto- 
riously not  so.  Nor  does  it  diminish  the  difficulty,  in  ad- 
mitting the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration,  to  say,  as 
the  Arminian  advocates  of  this  doctrine  invariably  do  say, 
that  those  who  are  once  regenerated  may  fall  from  grace, 
and  manifest  a  most  unhallowed  temper.  This  is  not  the 
question.  The  question  is,  does  experience  evince,  that 
every  subject  of  baptism,  who  has  reached  an  age  capable 
of  manifesting  the  Christian  character,  does,  at  the  moment 
of  receiving  the  baptismal  water,  show  that  he  is  the  sub- 
ject of  that  regenerating  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  by 
which  "  old  things  are  passed  away,  and  all  things  become 
new  in  the  Lord  ?"  No  one  who  has  a  particle  of  intelli- 
gence or  candour  can  imagine  that  any  such  fact  exists  ; 
but  if  it  do  not,  then  the  doctrine  under  consideration  falls 
of  course. 

3.  The  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration  is  contrary  te^ 
the  declared  opinion  of  the  most  pious,  judicious,  and 
venerable  Protestant  divines,  including  those  of  the  very 
highest  authority  in  the  church  of  England.  Nothing  can 
be  more  certain  than  that  the  mass  of  the  English  re- 
formers distinctly  taught  that  baptism  is  a  sig7i  only  of  re- 
generation, and  that  the  thing  signified  might  or  might  not 
accompany  the  administration  of  the  outward  ordinance, 
according  as  it  was  received  worthily  or  otherwise.  In 
support  of  this  assertion,  the  most  explicit  quotations 
might  be  presented  from  the  writings  of  those  distinguished 
martyrs  and  prelates,  Cranmer,  Latimer,  Ridley,  and 
Hooper ;  and  after  them  from  the  writings  of  the  eminent 
bishops,  Jewell,  Davenant,  Hall,  Usher,  Reynolds,  Leigh- 
ton,  Hopkins,  Tillotson,  Beveridge,  Burnet,  Seeker,  and  a 
host  of  other  divines  of  the  English  church,  of  whose  ele- 
vated character  it  would  be  litde  less  than  an  insult  to  any 

*  Faber's  Sermons,  Vol.  I.  p.  145,  146. 


130  ADDITIONAL    NOTES. 

intelligent  reader  to  attempt  to  offer  testimony.  All  these 
men  declare  in  the  most  solemn  manner,  against  the  doc- 
trine of  baptismal  regeneration,  in  the  sense  which  we  are 
now  considering.  Indeed,  I  cannot  call  to  mind  a  single 
writer  of  that  church,  from  the  time  of  Archbishop  Cran- 
mer  to  the  present  hour,  who  had  the  least  claim  to  the 
character  of  an  evangelical  man,  who  did  not  repudiate  the 
doctrine  which  I  am  now  opposing ;  and  not  a  few  of  them 
denounce  it  as  Popish,  and  adapted  to  subvert  the  whole 
system  of  vital  and  spiritual  religion. 

4.  The  last  argument  which  I  shall  urge  against  the  doc- 
trine of  baptismal  regeneration,  is,  that  is  it  adapted  to  gene- 
rate the  most  fatal  errors  with  regard  to  the  Gospel  plan  of 
salvation. 

So  far  as  this  doctrine  is  believed,  its  native  tendency  is, 
to  beget  a  superstitious  and  unwarranted  reliance  on  an  ex- 
ternal ordinance  ;  to  lower  our  estimate  of  that  inward  spi- 
ritual sanctification  which  constitutes  the  essence  of  the 
Christian  character ;  in  fact,  to  supersede  the  necessity  of 
that  spiritual  change  of  heart,  of  which  the  Scriptures 
speak  so  much,  and  for  which  the  most  holy  and  eminent 
servants  of  Christ  have,  in  all  ages,  contended.  The  truth 
is,  the  doctrine  now  under  consideration  is  the  very  same, 
in  substance,  with  the  doctrine  of  the  opus  operatum  of  the 
Papists,  which  all  evangelical  Protestants  have  been  oppos- 
ing for  more  than  three  hundred  years,  as  a  mischievous 
delusion.  Accordingly,  the  Popish  character  and  fatal  ten- 
dency of  this  error  have  been  unreservedly  acknowledged 
by  many  bishops,  and  other  pious  divines  of  the  church  of 
England,  as  well  as  by  many  of  the  same  denomination  in 
this  country. 

Further ;  if  regeneration,  which  is  the  commencement 
of  holiness  in  the  soul,  is  always  communicated  in  baptism, 
then  it  follows,  as,  indeed,  those  who  entertain  this  doctrine 
distinctly  avow,— that  baptism  invariably  places  its  subject 
in  a  state  of  salvation  ;  so  that  every  baptized  person  who 
dies  immediately  after  the  administration  of  this  sacrament, 
is  infallibly  sure  of  entering  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  If 
this  doctrine  were  fully  believed,  would  not  every  thinking, 
anxious  parent  refrain  from  having  his  child  baptized  in 
infancy,  and  reserve  the  ordinance  for  an  hour  of  extremity, 


ADDITIONAL   NOTES.  131 

such  as  the  approach  of  death,  that  it  might  serve  as  an 
unfailing  passport  to  glory  ?  Would  it  not  be  wise  in 
every  adult  who  may  be  brought  to  a  knowledge  of  the 
Saviour,  from  Paganism,  or  from  the  world,  to  put  off  his 
baptism  to  the  last  hour  of  his  life,  that  he  might  be  sure  of 
departing  in  safety  ?  This  is  well  known  to  have  been  one 
of  the  actual  corruptions  of  the  fourth  century,  growing 
out  of  the  very  error  which  I  am  now  opposing.  "  It  was 
the  custom  of  many,"  says  Dr.  Mosheim,  "  in  that  century, 
to  put  off  their  baptism  till  the  last  hour  ;  that  thus  imme- 
diately after  receiving  by  this  rite  the  remission  of  their 
sins,  they  might  ascend  pure  and  spotless  to  the  mansions 
of  life  and  immortality."  This  is  no  far-fetched  or  strange 
conceit.  It  is  the  native  fruit  of  the  doctrine  before  us. 
Nay,  if  we  suppose  this  pernicious  theory  to  take  full  pos- 
session of  the  mind,  would  it  not  be  natural  that  a  tender 
parent  should  anxiously  desire  his  child  to  die  immediately 
after  baptism  ;  or  even,  in  a  desperate  case,  to  compass  its 
death,  as  infallibly  for  its  eternal  benefit  ?  And,  on  the 
same  principle,  might  we  not  pray  for  the  death  of  every 
adult,  immediately  after  he  had  received  baptism,  believing 
that  then  "  to  die  would  certainly  be  gain  ?"  In  fine,  I  see  not, 
if  the  doctrine  be  true,  tliat  a  regenerating  and  saving  efiicacy 
attends  every  regular  baptism — I  see  not  how  we  can  avoid 
the  conclusion,  that  every  Pagan,  whether  child  or  adult, 
that  can  be  seized  by  force,  and,  however  thoughtless,  re- 
luctant or  profane,  made  to  submit  to  the  rite  of  baptism,  is 
thereby  infallibly  made  "  a  child  of  God,  and  an  inheritor 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven !" 

These  consequences,  which  appear  to  me  demonstrably 
to  flow  from  the  theory  in  question,  afford  sufficient  evi- 
dence that  it  is  an  unscriptural  and  pernicious  error,  even  if 
no  other  means  of  refutation  could  be  found. 

It  is  not  forgotten  that  language  which  seems,  at  first 
view,  to  countenance  the  doctrine  which  I  am  opposing,  is 
found  in  some  of  the  early  Fathers.  Some  of  them  do 
employ  terms  which  would  imply,  if  interpreted  literally, 
that  baptism  and  regeneration  were  the  same  thing.  But 
the  reason  of  this  is  obvious.  The  Jews  were  accustomed 
to  call  the  converts  to  their  religion  from  the  Gentiles, 
little  children,  and  their   introduction   into   the   Jewish 


132  ADDITIONAL    NOTES. 

church,  a  new  birth,  because  they  were  brought,  as  it  were, 
into  a  new  inoral  world.  Accordingly,  circumcision  is  re- 
peatedly called  in  Scripture  "  the  covenant,''^  because  it 
was  the  sign  of  the  covenant.  Afterwards,  when  baptism, 
as  a  Christian  ordinance,  became  identified  with  the  recep- 
tion of  the  Gospel,  the  early  writers  and  preachers  began 
to  call  this  ordinance  regeneration,  and  sometimes  illumi' 
nation,  because  every  adult  who  was  baptized,  professed 
to  be  born  of  God,  illuminated  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  By 
a  common  figure  of  speech,  they  called  the  sig7i  by  the 
name  of  the  thing  signijied.  In  the  truly  primitive  times 
this  language  was  harmless,  and  well  understood :  but 
as  superstition  increased,  it  gradually  led  to  mischievous 
error,  and  became  the  parent  of  complicated  and  deplorable 
delusions. 

II.  But  there  is  another  view  of  the  doctrine  of  baptismal 
regeneration,  which  is  sometimes  taken,  and  which,  though 
less  pernicious  than  that  which  has  been  examined,  is  still, 
I  apprehend,  fitted  to  mislead,  and,  of  course,  to  do  essen- 
tial mischief.  It  is  this  :  That  baptism  is  that  rite  which 
marks  and  ratifies  the  introduction  of  its  subject  into  the 
visible  kingdom  of  Christ ;  that  in  this  ordinance  the  bap- 
tized person  is  brought  into  a  new  state  or  relation  to 
Christ,  and  his  sacred  family ;  and  that  this  new  state  or 
relation  is  designated  in  Scripture  by  the  term  regene- 
ration, being  intended  to  express  an  ecclesiastical  birth, 
that  is,  being  "  born"  into  the  visible  kingdom  of  the  Re- 
deemer. Those  who  entertain  this  opinion  do  not  deny, 
that  there  is  a  great  moral  change,  wrought  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  which  must  pass  upon  every  one,  before  he  can  be 
in  a  state  of  salvation.  This  they  call  conversion,  renova- 
tion, &c.;  but  they  tell  us  that  the  term  "  regeneration''^ 
ought  not  to  be  applied  to  this  spiritual  change  ;  that 
it  ought  to  be  confined  to  that  change  of  state  and  of  rela- 
tion to  the  visible  kingdom  of  Christ  which  is  constituted 
by  baptism ;  so  that  a  person,  according  to  them,  may  be 
regenerated,  that  is,  regularly  introduced  into  the  visible 
church,  without  being  really  born  of  the  Spirit.  This 
theory,  though  by  no  means  so  fatal  in  its  tendency  as  the 
preceding,  still  appears  to  me  liable  to  the  following  serious 
objections. 


ADDITIONAL   NOTES.  133 

1.  It  makes  an  unauthorized  use  of  an  important  theolo- 
gical term.  It  is  vain  to  say,  that,  after  giving  fair  notice  of 
the  sense  in  which  we  use  a  term,  no  misapprehension  or 
harm  can  result  from  the  constant  use  of  it  in  that  sense. 
The  plea  is  insufficient.  If  the  sense  in  question  be  an 
unusual,  and  especially  an  unscriptural  one,  no  one  can  es- 
timate the  mischief  which  may  result  from  the  use  of  it  in 
that  sense.  Names  are  so  closely  connected  with  things^ 
that  it  is  of  the  utmost  importance  to  preserve  the  nomen- 
clature of  theology  from  perversion  and  abuse.  If  the 
sense  of  the  word  *'  regeneration"  which  is  embraced  in 
this  theory,  were  now  by  common  consent  admitted,  it 
would  give  an  entirely  new  aspect  to  all  those  passages  of 
Scripture  in  which  either  regeneration  or  baptism  is  men- 
tioned, making  some  of  them  unmeaning,  and  others  ridi- 
culous ;  and  render  unintelligible,  and  in  a  great  measure 
useless,  if  not  delusive,  nine-tenths  of  the  best  works  on 
the  subject  of  practical  religion  that  have  ever  been  written. 

2.  But  there  is  a  more  serious  objection.  If  men  be  told 
that  evfery  one  who  is  baptized,  is  thereby  regenerated — 
"born  of  God," — "born  of  the  Spirit," — made  a  "new- 
creature  in  Christ," — will  not  the  mass  of  mankind,  in 
spite  of  every  precaution  and  explanation  that  can  be  em- 
ployed, be  likely  to  mistake  on  a  fundamantal  point;  to 
imagine  that  the  disease  of  our  nature  is  trivial,  and  that  a 
trivial  remedy  for  it  will  answer ;  to  lay  more  stress  than 
they  ought  upon  an  external  rite  ;  and  to  make  a  much 
lower  estimate  than  they  ought  of  the  nature  and  necessity 
of  that  holiness  without  which  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord  ? 

After  all,  however,  although  the  doctrine  of  baptismal 
regeneration,  in  the  first  and  most  objectionable  sense, 
is  known  to  be  rejected  by  all  the  truly  evangelical  divines 
of  the  church  of  England,  and  by  the  same  class  in  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  church  in  this  country  ;  yet  it  cannot 
be  denied  that  something,  to  say  the  least,  very  like  this 
docti'ine  is  embodied  in  the  baptismal  service  of  that  deno- 
mination on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic.  The  following  spe- 
cimens of  its  language  will  at  once  illustrate  and  confirm 
my  meaning  :  "  Seeing  now,  dearly  beloved  brethren,  that 
this  child  is  regenerate,  and  grafted  into  the  body  of  Chris  fs 
church,  let  us  give  thanks  unto  Almighty  God  for  these 


134  ADDITIONAL   NOTES. 

benefits,  and  with  one  accord  make  our  prayers  unto  him, 
that  this  child  may  lead  the  rest  of  his  life  according  to  this 
beginning."  And  again :  "  We  yield  thee  hearty  thanks, 
most  merciful  Father,  that  it  hath  pleased  thee  to  regene- 
rate this  infant  by  thy  Holy  Spirit,  to  receive  him  for 
thine  own  child  by  adoption,  and  to  incorporate  him  into 
thy  holy  church,"  &c.  The  same  language  is  also  repeated 
in  the  baptismal  service  for  "  those  of  riper  years."  They 
are  represented  as  being  *' regenerated ;"  as  being  "born 
again,"  and  "made  heirs  of  salvation;"  and  as  having 
"  put  on  Christ."  This  language  is  differently  interpreted, 
by  the  Episcopal  ministers  who  employ  it,  according  to  the 
opinion  which  they  adopt  with  regard  to  baptism.  Those 
who  coincide  in  opinion  with  Bishop  Mant,  and  others  of 
similar  sentiments,  make  no  scruple  of  avowing,  that  these 
expressions  literally  import,  what  they  fully  believe,  that 
every  one  who  is  duly  baptized,  is,  in  and  by  that  rite,  born 
of  the  Spirit,  and  brought  into  a  state  of  grace  and  salvation. 
A  second  class  of  interpreters,  however,  consider  this  lan- 
guage of  the  Liturgy  as  merely  importing  that  the  person 
baptized  is  brought  into  a  new  state,  or  a  new  relation  to 
the  visible  church.  While  a  third  class,  although  they  ac- 
knowledge that  the  language  before  us,  literally  interpreted, 
does  certainly  express  more  than  a  mere  visible  relation, 
even  the  participation  of  truly  spiritual  and  saving  blessings ; 
yet  say,  that  they  can  conscientiously  employ  it,  because  a 
Liturgy  intended  for  general  use,  ought  to  be,  and  must  be, 
constructed  upon  the  principle,  that  those  who  come  to  re- 
ceive its  offices  are  all  to  be  considered  as  sincere,  and  as 
having  a  right,  in  the  sight  of  God,  to  the  ordinance 
for  which  they  apply !  And  thus  it  happens,  that  those 
who  reject  as  Popish  and  delusive,  the  doctrine  of  baptis- 
mal regeneration,  as  taught  by  Mant,  and  those  who  concur 
with  him,  feel  no  difficulty  in  publicly  and  solemnly  re- 
peating this  language,  every  time  they  administer  the  ordi- 
nance of  baptism. 

It  is  not  for  one  of  another  communion  to  interpose 
between  the  consciences  of  Episcopal  ministers,  and  the 
import  of  their  public  formularies.  In  fidelity  to  my  own 
principles,  however,  and  as  a  warning  to  those  of  my  own 
church  who  may  be  assailed  by  the  proselyting  efforts  of 
some  of  this  denomination,  I  may  be  permitted  to  say,  that 


ADDITIONAL   NOTES.  135 

if  I  believed  with  Bishop  Mant,  and  his  associates  in  senti- 
ment, the  language  of  the  baptismal  service  would  be  en- 
tirely to  my  taste  ;  but  if  not,  I  could  not,  on  any  account, 
conscientiously  employ  it.  It  would  not  satisfy  me  to  be 
told,  that  the  language  of  one  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles, 
and  some  of  the  language  found  in  the  Book  of  Homilies, 
bears  a  different  aspect.  This  is,  no  doubt,  true.  Still 
this  does  not  remove  or  alter  the  language  of  the  baptismal 
service.  There  it  stands,  a  distress  and  a  snare  to  thou- 
sands of  good  men,  who  acknowledge  that  they  could  wish 
it  otherwise,  but  dare  not  modify  it  in  the  smallest  jot  or 
tittle.'*^  Had  I  no  other  objection  to  ministering  in  the 
church  of  England,  or  in  the  corresponding  denomination 
in  this  country — this  part  of  the  Liturgy  would  alone  be 
an  insurmountable  one.  I  could  not  consent  continually  to 
employ  language,  which,  however  explained  or  counter- 
acted, is  so  directly  adapted  to  deceive  in  a  most  vital  point 
of  practical  religion.  I  could  not  allow  myself  to  sanction 
by  adoption  and  use,  language  which,  however  explained 
and  counteracted  in  ray  own  ministry,  I  knew  to  be  pre- 
sented and  urged  by  many  around  me  in  its  literal  import, 
and  declared  to  be  the  only  true  doctrine  of  the  church. 

As  to  the  plea,  that  a  Liturgy  must  necessarily  be  con- 
structed upon  the  principle  that  all  who  come  to  its  offices 
must  be  presumed  to  be  sincere,  and  be  solemnly  assured, 
in  the  name  of  God,  that  they  are  so,  nothing  can  be  more 
delusive.  Cannot  scriptural  truth  be  as  plainly  stated,  and 
as  wisely  guarded  in  a  liturgical  composition  as  in  any 
other  ?  Our  Methodist  brethren  have  a  prescribed  form 
for  baptism;  and  so  far  as  I  recollect  its  language,  they 
have  succeeded,  without  apparent  difficulty,  in  making  it 
at  once  instructive,  solemn,  appropriate,  and  unexceptiona- 
ble. And  I  have  heard  Presbyterian  ministers  a  thousand 
times  tell  their  hearers,  with  as  much  distinctness  in  admi- 
nistering sacraments,  as  in  ordinary  preaching,  that  "  the 
sacraments  become  effectual  to  salvation,  not  from  any  vir- 
tue in  them,  or  in  him  that  doth  administer  them  ;  but  only 

*  An  evangelical  and  deeply  conscientious  minister  of  the  Episco- 
pal church,  who,  after  struggling  for  some  time  with  the  most  distress- 
ing scruples,  as  to  this  very  feature  in  the  baptismal  service,  ventured 
to  alter  a  few  words,  was  forthwith,  by  his  diocesan,  dismissed  from 
the  ministry. 


136  ADDITIONAL    NOTES. 

by  the  blessing  of  Christ,  and  the  working  of  his  Spirit  in 
them  that  by  faith  receive  them.^^ 

But  it  may  be  asked,  what  kind  or  degree  of  efficacy  do 
Presbyterians  consider  as  connected  with  baptism?  Do 
they  suppose  that  there  is  any  beneficial  influence,  physical 
or  moral,  in  all  cases,  connected  with  the  due  administra- 
tion of  this  sacrament  ?  I  answer,  no7ie  at  all.  They 
suppose  that  the  washing  with  water  in  this  ordinance  is  an 
emblem  and  a  sig7i  of  precious  benefits  ;  that  it  holds  forth 
certain  gi-eat  truths,  which  are  the  glory  of  the  Christian 
covenant,  and  the  joy  of  the  Christian's  heart;  that  it  is  a 
seal  affixed  by  God  to  his  covenant  with  his  people, 
whereby  he  certifies  his  pm-poses  of  grace,  and  pledges  his 
blessing  to  all  who  receive  it  with  a  living  faith  ;  nay,  that 
it  is  the  seal  of  valuable  outward  privileges,  even  to  those 
who  are  not  then,  or  at  any  other  time,  "  born  of  the 
Spirit;"  that,  as  a  solemn  rite  appointed  by  Christ,  it  is 
adapted  to  make  a  solemn  impression  on  the  serious  mind ; 
but  that  when  it  is  administered  to  the  persons,  or  the  off- 
spring of  those  who  are  entirely  destitute  of  faith,  there  is 
no  pledge  or  certainty  that  it  will  be  accompanied  with  any 
blessing.  They  receive  the  water,  but  not  the  Spirit. 
They  are  engrafted  into  the  visible  church,  but  not  into  the 
spiritual  body  of  Christ,  and  are,  after  baptism,  just  as 
they  were  before,  like  Simon  the  Sorcerer,  "  in  the  gall  of 
bitterness  and  in  the  bond  of  iniquity." 


(Note  C.) 

Sponsors  in  Baptism. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  Presbyterian  church  differs 
from  the  Episcopal  in  regard  to  the  subject  announced  at 
the  head  of  this  note.  We  differ  in  two  respects.  First, 
in  not  requiring  or  encouraging  the  appearance  of  any 
other  sponsors,  in  the  baptism  of  children,  than  ihe  parents, 
when  they  are  living  and  qualified  to  present  themselves  in 
this  character :  and,  secondly,  in  not  requiring,  or  even  ad- 
mitting any  sponsors  at  all  in  cases  of  adult  baptism.  My 
object  in  the  remarks  which  I  am  about  to  make  on  this 


ADDITIONAL   NOTES.  137 

subject,  is,  not  to  impugn  either  the  principles  or  practice 
of  our  Episcopal  brethren ;  but  simply  to  state,  for  the  in- 
struction of  the  members  of  our  own  church,  why  we  can- 
not think  or  act  with  them  in  relation  to  this  matter. 

It  is  curious  to  observe  the  several  steps  by  which  the 
use  of  sponsors,  as  now  established  in  the  Romish  and 
some  Protestant  churches,  reached  its  present  form.  Within 
the  first  five  or  six  hundred  years  after  Christ,  there  is  no 
evidence  that  children  were  et^er  presented  for  baptism  by 
any  other  persons  than  their  pareitts,  provided  those  pa- 
rents were  living,  and  were  professing  Christians.  When 
some  persons,  in  the  time  of  Augustine,  who  flourished 
toward  the  close  of  the  fourth^  and  beginning  of  the  fifth 
century,  contended  that  it  was  not  lawful,  in  any  case,  for 
any  excepting  their  natural  parents  to  offer  children  in  bap- 
tism ;  that  learned  and  pious  Father  opposed  them,  and 
gave  it  as  his  opinion,  that,  in  extraordinary  cases,  as,  for 
example,  when  the  parents  were  dead;  when  they  were 
not  professing  Christians  ;  when  they  cruelly  forsook  and 
exposed  their  offspring ;  and  when  masters  had  young 
slaves  committed  to  their  charge  ;  in  these  cases,  (and  the 
pious  Father  mentions  no  others,)  he  maintains  that  any 
professing  Christians,  who  should  be  willing  to  undertake 
the  benevolent  charge,  might,  with  propriety,  take  these 
children,  offer  them  in  baptism,  and  become  responsible  for 
their  Christian  education.  This,  every  one  will  perceive, 
is  in  strict  conformity  with  the  principles  maintained  in  the 
foregoing  essay,  and  with  the  doctrine  and  habits  of  the 
Presbyterian  church. 

The  learned  Bingham,  an  Episcopal  divine  of  great 
learning,  seems  to  have  taken  unwearied  pains,  in  his  "  Ec- 
clesiastical Antiquities,"  to  collect  every  scrap  of  testimony 
within  his  reach,  in  favour  of  the  early  origin  of  sponsors. 
But  he  utterly  fails  of  producing  even  plausible  evidence  to 
that  amount ;  and  at  length  candidly  acknowledges  that  in 
the  early  ages,  parents  were,  in  all  ordinary  cases,  the  pre- 
sentors  and  sureties  for  their  own  children;  and  that 
children  were  presented  by  others  only  in  extraordinary 
cases,  such  as  those  already  alluded  to.  It  is  true,  indeed, 
that  some  writers,  more  sanguine  than  discriminating, 
have  quoted  Dionysius,  Tertullian,  and  Cyril  of  Alexan- 


139  ADDITIONAL   NOTES. 

dria,  as  affording  countenance  to  the  use  of  sponsors  in 
early  times.  Not  one  of  those  writers,  however,  has 
written  a  sentence  which  favours  the  use  of  any  other 
sponsors  than  parents,  when  they  were  in  life,  and  of  a 
proper  character  to  offer  their  children  for  the  sacramental 
seal  in  question.  Even  Dionysius,  whose  language  has,  at 
first  view,  some  appearance  of  favouring  such  sponsors ; 
yet,  when  carefully  examined,  will  be  found  to  speak  only 
of  sponsors  who  undertook  to  train  up  in  the  Christian  re- 
ligion some  of  the  children  of  Pagans,  who  were  delivered, 
for  this  purpose,  into  the  hands  of  these  benevolent  sure- 
ties, by  their  unbelieving  parents.  But  this,  surely,  is  not 
inconsistent  with  what  has  been  said.  And,  after  all,  the 
writings  of  this  very  Dionysius  are  given  up  by  the  learned 
Wall,  and  by  the  still  more  learned  and  illustrious  Archbi- 
shop Usher,  as  a  "  gross  and  impudent  forgery,"  unworthy 
of  the  least  credit. 

It  was  not  until  the  council  of  Mentz,  in  the  ninth  cen- 
tury, that  the  church  of  Rome  forbade  the  appearance  of 
parents  as  sponsors  for  their  own  children,  and  required 
that  this  service  be  surrendered  to  other  hands. 

Mention  is  made,  by  Cyril,  in  the  fifth  century,  and  by 
Fulgentius  in  the  sixths  of  sponsors  in  some  peculiar  cases 
of  adult  baptism.  When  adults,  about  to  be  baptized, 
were  dumb,  or  under  the  power  of  delirium,  through  dis- 
ease, and  of  course  unable  to  speak  for  themselves,  or  to 
make  the  usual  profession ;  in  such  cases  it  was  customary 
for  some  friend  or  friends  to  answer  for  them,  and  to  bear 
testimony  to  their  good  character,  and  to  the  fact  of  their 
having  before  expressed  a  desire  to  be  baptized.  For  this, 
there  was,  undoubtedly,  some  reason ;  and  the  same  thing 
might,  with  propriety,  in  conceivable  circumstances  be 
done  now.  From  this,  however,  there  was  a  transition 
soon  made  to  the  use  of  sponsors  in  all  cases  of  adult  bap- 
tism. This  latter,  however,  was  upon  a  different  principle 
from  the  former.  When  adults  had  the  gifts  of  speech  and 
reason,  and  were  able  to  answer  for  themselves,  the  spon- 
sors provided  for  such  never  answered  or  professed  for 
them.  This  was  invariably  done  by  the  adult  himself. 
Their  only  business,  as  it  would  appear,  was  to  be  a  kind 
of  curators  or  guardians  of  the  spiritual  life  of  the  persons 
baptized.     This  office  was  generally  fulfilled,  in  each 


ADDITIONAL   NOTES.  139 

church,  by  the  deacons,  when  adult  males  were  baptized ; 
and  by  the  deaconesses,  when  females  came  forward  to 
receive  this  ordinance. 

Among  the  pious  Waldenses  and  Albigenses,  in  the  mid- 
dle ages,  no  other  sponsors  than  parents  seem  to  have  been 
in  common  use.  In  one  of  their  catechisms,  as  preserved 
by  Perrin,  and  Morland,  they  ask,  "  By  whom  ought 
children  to  be  presented  in  baptism  ?"  Answer,  "  By  their 
parents,  or  by  any  others  who  may  be  inspired  with  this 
charity ;"  which  is  evidently  intended  to  mean,  as  other 
documents  respecting  them  show,  that  where  the  parents 
were  dead,  or  absent,  or  could  not  act,  other  pious  profes- 
sors of  religion  might  take  their  places. 

According  to  one  of  the  canons  of  the  church  of  Eng- 
land, "  parents  are  not  to  be  urged  to  he  present  when  their 
children  are  baptized,  nor  to  be  permitted  to  stand  as  spon- 
sors for  their  own  children."  In  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
church  in  this  country,  parents  "  may  be  admitted  as  spon- 
sors if  it  be  desired."  But  in  both  countries  it  is  required 
that  there  be  sponsors  for  all  adults,  as  well  as  for  infants. 

The  baptismal  service  of  the  Methodist  church  in  the 
United  States,  for  infants,  does  not  recognise  the  use  of  any 
sponsors  at  all,  excepting  the  parents,  or  whatever  other 
"  friends"  may  present  them. 

It  is  plain,  then,  that  the  early  history  of  the  church,  as 
well  as  the  Word  of  God,  abundantly  sustains  the  doctrine 
and  practice  of  the  Presbyterian  church  in  this  matter.  We 
maintain,  that  as  the  right  of  the  children  of  believers  to 
baptism,  flows  from  the  membership  and  faith  of  their  parents 
according  to  the  flesh ;  so  those  parents,  if  living,  are  the 
only  proper  persons  to  present  them  for  the  reception  of 
this  covenant  seal.  If,  however,  their  proper  parents,  on 
any  account,  cannot  do  this,  they  may,  upon  our  principles, 
with  propriety,  be  presented  by  any  professed  believers, 
who,  quoad  hoc,  adopt  them  as  their  children,  and'are  willing 
to  engage,  as  parents,  to  "  bring  them  up  in  the  nurture  and 
admonition  of  the  Lord." 

If,  indeed,  nothing  else  were  contended  for  in  this  case, 
than  that,  when  believing  parents  have  pious  and  peculiar 
friends  who  are  willing  to  unite  with  them  in  engagements 
to  educate  their  children  in  the  true  religion,  such  friends 
might  be  permitted  to  Btand  with  them  ;  there  might  not  be 


140  ADDITIONAL    NOTES. 

SO  much  to  condemn.  Even  then  the  solemn  question 
might  be  asked ;  *'  Who  hath  required  this  at  your  hands  ?" 
But  when  the  system  is,  to  set  aside  parents  ;  to  require 
that  others  take  their  places,  and  make  engagements  which 
they  alone,  for  the  most  part,  are  qualified  to  make ;  and 
when,  in  pursuance  of  this  system,  thousands  are  daily 
making  engagements  which  they  never  think  of  fulfilling, 
and  in  most  cases,  notoriously  have  it  not  in  their  poAverto 
fulfil,  and,  indeed,  feel  no  special  obligation  to  fulfil; 
we  are  constrained  to  regard  it  as  a  human  invention, 
having  no  warrant  whatever,  either,  from  the  Word  of 
God  or  primitive  usage ;  and  as  adapted,  on  a  variety  of 
accounts,  to  generate  evil,  much  evil,  rather  than  good. 


(Note  D.) 
Confirmation. 

In  the  apostolic  church,  there  was  no  such  rite  as  that 
which  under  this  name  has  been  long  established  in  the 
Romish  communion  as  a  sacrament,  and  adopted  in  some 
Protestant  churches  as  a  solemnity,  in  their  view,  if  not 
commanded,  yet  as  both  expressive  and  edifying.  It  is  not 
intended  in  this  note  to  record  a  sentence  condemnatory  of 
those  who  think  proper  to  employ  the  rite  in  question : 
but  only  to  state  with  brevity  some  of  the  reasons  why  the 
fathers  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  thought  proper  to  ex- 
clude it  from  their  ritual ;  and  why  their  sons,  to  the  present 
hour,  have  persisted  in  the  same  course. 

1 .  We  find  no  foundation  for  this  rite  in  the  Word  of 
G  od.  Indeed  our  Episcopal  brethren,  and  other  Protestants 
who  employ  it,  do  not  pretend  to  find  any  direct  warrant 
for  it  in  Scripture.  All  they  have  to  allege,  which  bears 
the  least  resemblance  to  any  such  practice,  is  the  statement 
recorded  in  Acts  viii.  14 — 17 :  Now  when  the  Apostles, 
which  were  at  Jerusalem,  heard  that  Samaria  had  received 
the  AVord  of  God,  they  sent  unto  them  Peter  and  John, 
who  when  they  were  come  down,  prayed  for  them,  that 
they  might  receive  the  Holy  Ghost.  (For  as  yet  he  was 
fallen  upon  none  of  them ;  only  they  were  baptized  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.)     Then  laid  they  their  hands  on 


ADDITIONAL    NOTES.  141 

tliem,  and  they  received  the  Holy  Ghost.  That  there  is 
here  a  reference  to  the  extraordinary  or  miraculous  gifts 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  these  conferred  by  extraordinary 
officers,  is  so  perfectly  apparent,  that  it  is  no  wonder  the 
advocates  of  Confirmation  do  not  press  it  as  proof  of  their 
point.  The  only  wonder  is,  that  they  ever  mention  it  as 
aflbrding  the  most  remote  countenance  to  their  practice. 
Tlie  diligent  reader  of  Scripture  will  find  four  kinds,  or 
occasions  of  laying  on  hands  recounted  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. The  first,  by  Christ  himself,  to  express  an  authori- 
tative benediction.  Matt.  xix.  Mark  x.  16;  the  second,  in 
the  healing  of  diseases,  Mark  xvi.  18.  Acts  xxviii.  8 ;  the 
third,  in  conferring  the  extraordinary  gifts  of  the  Spirit, 
Acts  viii.  17.  xix.  6;  and  the  fourth,  in  setting  apart  per- 
sons to  sacred  oflice.  Acts  vi.  6.  xiii.  3.  1  Tim.  iv.  14.  The 
venerable  Dr.  Owen,  in  his  commentary  on  Heb.  vi.  2, 
expresses  the  opinion,  that  the  laying  on  of  hands  there 
spoken  of,  is  to  be  considered  as  belonging  to  the  third  class  of 
cases,  and,  of  course,  as  referring  to  the  extraordinary  gifts 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Others  have  supposed  that  it  rather 
belongs  to  the  fourth  example  above  enumerated,  and  there- 
fore applies  to  the  ordination  of  ministers.  But  there  is 
not  a  syllable  or  hint  in  the  whole  New  Testament  which 
looks  like  such  a  laying  on  of  hands  as  that  for  which  the 
advocates  of  Confirmation  contend. 

2.  Quite  as  little  support  for  Confirmation  can  be  found 
in  the  purest  and  best  periods  of  uninspired  antiquity. 
Towards  the  close  of  the  second  century,  several  uncom- 
manded  and  superstitious  additions  had  been  made  to  the 
ordinance  of  baptism.  Among  these  were  anointing  with 
nil,  in  avowed  imitation  of  the  Jewish  manner  of  consecra- 
tion ;  administering  to  the  baptized  individual  a  mixture  of 
milk  and  honey,  as  the  symbol  of  his  childhood  in  a  new 
life,  and  as  a  pledge  of  that  heavenly  Canaan,  with  all  its 
advantages  and  happiness,  to  which  the  hopes  of  the  bap- 
tized were  directed  ;  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the 
minister  officiating  in  baptism,  for  imparting  the  Holy 
Spirit;  to  all  which  may  be  added,  that  immediately 
after  the  close  of  this  century,  we  find  the  practice  oi  exor- 
cism  introduced  as  a  preliminary  to  baptism,  and  as  a  means 
of  expelling  all  evil  spirits  from  the  candidate  for  this  ordi- 
nance.    These  superstitious  additions  were  made  to  sue- 


142  ADDITIONAL   NOTES. 

ceed  each  other  in  the  following  order ;  exorcism,  confes- 
sion; renunciation;  baptism;  chrismation,  or  anointing 
with  oil,  which  was  done  in  the  form  of  a  cross ;  and  final- 
ly, the  laying  on  of  hands,  or  confirmation,  which  imme- 
diately followed  the  anointing  with  oil,  and  the  administra- 
tion of  the  simple  element  above  mentioned.  "  As  soon  as 
we  are  baptized,"  says  Tertidlian,  "  we  are  anointed  with 
the  blessed  unction."  And  he  adds,  "This  unction  is 
according  to  the  Jewish  dispensation,  wherein  the  high 
priest  was  anointed  with  oil  out  of  a  horn."  The  laying 
on  of  hands,  or  confirmation,  immediately  followed  the 
unction.  "  As  soon  as  we  come  from  the  baptismal  laver," 
says  Tertidlian,  "  We  are  anointed,  and  then  hands  are 
imposed."  This  was  considered  as  essential  to  the  com- 
pletion of  the  ordinance.  "We  do  not  receive  the  Holy 
Ghost,"  says  the  same  father,  "  in  baptism,  but  being  puri- 
fied by  the  water,  we  are  prepared  for  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
at  the  laying  on  of  hands,  the  soul  is  illuminated  by  the 
Spirit."  The  exorcism,  then,  the  anointing  with  oil,  the 
sign  of  the  cross,  the  imposition  of  hands  for  conveying 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  administration  of  milk  and  honey 
to  the  candidate,  were  all  human  additions  to  baptism, 
which  came  in  about  the  same  time,  and  ought,  in  our 
opinion,  to  be  regarded  very  much  in  the  same  light  ^vith  a 
great  variety  of  other  additions  to  the  institutions  of  Christ, 
which,  though  well  meant,  and  not  destitute  of  expressive- 
ness, are  yet  wholly  unauthorized  by  the  King  and  Head 
of  the  Church. 

3.  When  the  practice  of  the  laying  on  of  hands,  as  an 
ordinary  part  of  the  baptismal  service,  was  added,  by  human 
invention,  to  that  ordinance,  it  always  immediately  followed 
the  application  of  water,  and  the  anointing  with  oil.  "  As 
soon  as  we  come  from  the  baptismal  laver,"  says  Tertid- 
lian "  we  are  anointed,  and  then  hands  are  laid  on."  And 
it  is  further  acknowledged  by  all,  that  every  one  who  was 
competent  to  baptize,  was  equally  competent  to  lay  on 
hands.  The  two  things  always  went  together ;  or  rather 
formed  parts  of  the  baptismal  ordinance,  which  was  not 
thought  to  be  consummated  without  the  imposition  of  hands 
by  him  who  had  applied  the  water  and  the  unction.  And 
this  continued  to  be  the  case,  throughout  the  greater  part 
of  the  church,  for  the  first  three  hundred  years.     Then  the 


ADDITIONAL    NOTES.  143 

term  bishop  signified  the  pastor  or  overseer  of  a  flock  or 
congregation.  Every  pastor  Avas  a  bishop,  as  had  been  the 
case  in  Apostolic  times.  And  then,  in  ordinary  cases,  none 
but  the  bishop,  or  pastor  of  each  church,  administered  bap- 
tism. Of  course,  he  only  laid  on  hands.  But  afterwards, 
in  the  progress  of  corruption,  when  Prelacy  was  gradually 
brought  in,  it  became  customary,  for  the  sake  of  doing 
greater  honour  to  the  prelates,  to  reserve  this  imposition  of 
hands  to  them,  as  a  part  of  their  official  prerogative. 
Jerome  (Dialog.  Adv.  Lucifer.)  expressly  declares,  that  the 
committing  this  benediction  wholly  to  the  bishop;?,  was 
done  *'  rather  in  honour  of  the  priesthood,  than  from  neces- 
sity imposed  by  any  law."  Even  now,  throughout  the 
Greek  Church,  this  rite  is  administered,  for  the  most  part, 
in  close  connection  with  baptism,  and  is  dispensed  by  any 
priest  who  is  empowered  to  baptize.  In  like  manner,  in 
the  Lutheran  and  other  German  churches,  in  wiiich  con- 
firmation is  retained,  it  is  administered  by  every  pastor. 
Still,  even  when  confined  to  prelates,  this  imposition  of 
hands  was  not,  in  ordinary  cases,  long  separated  from  the 
baptism  :  for  the  children  were  commonly  carried  to  the 
bishop  to  have  his  hands  laid  upon  them  as  soon  as  conve- 
nient. After  a  while,  however,  it  became  customary  to 
separate  the  two  things  much  more  widely.  Confirmation, 
or  the  laying  on  of  the  bishop's  hands,  began  to  be  post- 
poned for  a  number  of  years,  according  to  circumstances  ; 
until,  at  length,  it  was  often  left  till  the  arrival  of  adult  age, 
and  even,  in  some  cases,  till  the  decline  of  life.  All  these 
progressive  steps  evidently  marked  a  mere  human  invention, 
for  which  there  is  no  divine  appointment  or  warrant  what- 
ever. 

4.  The  rite  of  confirmation  is  superfluous.  As  it  was 
plainly  a  human  invention,  so  it  is  unnecessary ^  and  an- 
swers no  purpose  which  is  not  quite  as  well,  to  say  the 
least,  provided  for  in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  which  rejects 
it.  Is  it  said  to  be  desirable  that  there  should  be  some 
transaction  or  solemnity  by  which  young  people  who  have 
been  baptized  in  their  infancy,  may  be  called  to  recognize 
their  religious  obligations,  and,  as  it  were,  to  take  upon 
themselves  the  profession  and  the  vows  made  on  their 
behalf  in  baptism  ?  Granted.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
such  a  solemnity  is  both  reasonable  in  itself,  and  edifying 


144  ADDITIONAL    NOTES. 

in  its  tendency.  But  have  we  not  just  such  a  solemnity  in 
the  Lord's  Supper ;  an  ordinance  divinely  instituted ;  an 
ordinance  on  which  all  are  qualified  to  attend,  and  ought 
to  attend,  who  are  qualified  to  take  on  themselves,  in  any 
scriptural  or  rational  sense,  their  baptismal  obligations  ;  an 
ordinance,  in  fact,  specifically  intended,  among  other  things, 
to  answer  this  very  purpose,  viz.  the  purpose  of  making  a 
personal  acknowldgement  and  profession  of  the  truth,  the 
service,  and  the  hopes  of  Christ: — have  we  not,  I  say,  in 
the  Sacramental  Supper  just  such  a  solemnity  as  we  need 
for  the  end  in  question — simple,  rational,  scriptural,  and  to 
which  all  our  children  may  come,  just  as  soon  as  they  are 
prepared  in  any  form  to  confess  Christ  before  men  ?  We 
do  not  need  confirmation,  then,  for  the  purpose  for  which 
it  is  professed  to  be  desired.  We  have  something  better, 
because  appointed  of  God;  quite  as  expressive;  more 
solemn ;  and  free  from  certain  objectionable  features  which 
are  now  to  be  mentioned. 

5.  Finally;  we  reject  the  rite  of  confirmation  in  our 
Church,  because,  in  addition  to  all  the  reasons  which  have 
been  mentioned,  we  consider  the  formula  prescribed  for  its 
administration  in  the  Church  of  England,  and  substantially 
adopted  by  the  Episcopal  Church  in  this  country,  as  liable 
to  the  most  serious  objections.  We  do  not  think  it  a  duty 
in  any  form,  to  practise  a  rite  which  the  Saviour  never 
appointed ;  but  our  repugnance  is  greatly  increased  by  the 
language  with  which  the  rite  in  question  is  administered 
by  those  who  employ  it.  In  the  "  Order  of  Confirmation," 
as  prescribed  and  used  in  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  the  United  States,  the  following  language  occurs.  Be- 
fore the  act  of  laying  on  hands,  the  officiating  bishop,  in 
his  prayer,  repeats  the  following  language :  "  Almighty 
and  ever  living  God,  who  hast  vouchsafed  to  regenerate 
these  thy  servants,  by  water  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
hast  given  unto  them  forgiveness  of  all  their  sins,"  &;c.  &lq. 
And  again,  in  another  prayer,  after  the  act  of  confirma- 
tion is  completed,  he  speaks  to  the  Searcher  of  hearts 
thus — "  We  make  our  bumble  supplications  unto  thee 
for  these  thy  servants,  upon  whom,  after  the  example 
of  thy  holy  Apostles,  Ave  have  now  laid  our  hands  ;  to  cer- 
tify them  by  this  sign  of  thy  favour  and  gracious  goodness 
towards  them,"  &c.     And  also,  in  the  act  of  laying  on 


ADDITIONAL    NOTES.  145 

iiands,  assuming  that  all  -who  are  kneeling  before  him 
already  have  the  holy  sanctifying  spirit  of  Christ,  he  prays 
that  they  "  may  all  daily  increase  in  this  Holy  Spirit  more 
and  more." 

Such  is  the  language  addressed  to  large  circles  of  young 
people  of  both  sexes,  many  of  whom  there  is  every  reason 
to  fear,  are  very  far  from  having  been  "  born  of  the  Spirit," 
in  the  Bible  sense  of  that  phrase  ;  nay,  some  of  whom  mani- 
fest so  little  seriousness,  that  any  pastor  of  enhghtened  piety 
would  be  pained  to  see  them  at  a  communion  table  :  yet 
the  bishop  pronounces  them  all — and  he  appeals  to  heaven 
for  the  truth  of  his  sentence — he  pronounces  them  all 
regenerate,  not  only  by  ivater,  but  also  by  the  Holy  Ghost  ; 
certifies  to  them,  in  the  name  of  God,  that  they  are  objects 
of  the  divine  '■'■  favour f'  and  declares  that,  being  already 
in  a  state  of  grace  and  favour  with  God,  they  are  called  to 
"  grow  in  grace ;"  to  "increase  in  the  Holy  Spirit  more 
and  more." 

There  are  many  who  have  long  regarded,  and  who  now 
regard  this  language  not  only  with  regi-et,  but  with  shud- 
dering !  as  adapted  to  cherish  false  hopes,  nay,  to  deceive 
and  destroy  souls  by  w^holesale !  I  must  again  say,  that 
if  there  were  no  other  obstacle  to  my  consenting  to  minis- 
ter in  the  Protestant  Episcopal  church,  this  alone  would 
be  an  insurmountable  one.  For  it  must  come  home  to  the 
conscience  and  the  feelings,  not  of  the  bishop  only,  but  of 
every  pastor  in  that  church  who  has,  from  time  to  time,  a 
circle  of  beloved  youth  to  present  for  confirmation.  It  is 
vain  to  say,  that  the  church  presumes  that  all  who  come 
are  sincere,  and  of  course  born  of  the  Spirit,  and  in  a  state 
of  favour  with  God.  This  is  the  very  point  of  objection. 
She  so  presumes,  and  undertakes  to  "  certify''^  them  of  it. 
Presbyterian  ministers  do  not,  dare  not,  use  such  language. 
They  do  not,  and  dare  not,  undertake  to  "  certify"  to  any 
number  of  the  most  mature  and  exemplary  communicants 
that  ever  gathered  round  a  sacramental  table,  that  they  are 
all  in  a  state  of  grace  and  salvation,  and  that  they  have 
nothing  to  do  but  to  "follow  on,"  and  "increase  in  the 
Holy  Spirit."  Nor  is  it  a  sufficient  answer,  I  repeat,  to  say, 
that  a  liturg}^,  being  a  fixed  composition,  cannot  be  so  con- 
structed as  to  discriminate  between  different  characters. 


146  ADDITIONAL    NOTES. 

This  is  denied.  Every  enlightened  and  faithful  minister^ 
of  whatever  denomination,  who  is  at  liberty  to  employ  such 
language  as  he  approves,  knows  how  to  express  himself, 
both  in  prayer  and  preaching,  in  discriminating  and  impres- 
sive terms  ;  and  how  to  avoid  modes  of  expression  adapted 
to  deceive  and  betray  unwary  souls.  It  is  surely  not  im- 
practicable to  address  the  largest  and  most  promiscuous 
assembly  in  a  manner  which,  though  not  adapted  to  the 
precise  case  of  every  individual,  shall  be  at  least  free  from 
error,  free  from  every  thing  of  a  deceptive  and  ensnaring 
character.  Our  Methodist  brethren,  it  was  before  remarked, 
have  a  prescribed  liturgical  form  for  baptism ;  which  they 
have  rendered  sufficiently  discriminating,  and  at  the  same 
time  unexceptionably  safe.  And,  what  is  not  unworthy  of 
notice  in  this  place,  though  the  liturgy  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  church  is  evidently  the  model  which,  to  a  certain 
extent,  they  have  kept  before  them  in  constructing  their 
own,  they  have  wisely  discarded  altogether  the  ceremony 
of  confirmation  from  their  ritual. 

The  advocates  of  confirmation,  as  a  separate  ecclesiasti- 
cal rite,  seldom  fail  of  quoting  Calviyi  as  expressing  an 
opinion  decisively  in  favour  of  it.  This  is  doing  great  in- 
justice to  that  illustrious  man.  Calvin  directly  and  warmly 
opposes  the  idea  of  confirmation  being  considered  as  a  dis- 
tinct ordinance,  claiming  divine  authority  in  the  Church  of 
God.  This  he  reprobates  ;  and  especially  the  practice  of 
confining  the  administration  of  it  to  prelates ;  but  adds, 
"  that  he  has  no  objection  to  parents  bringing  their  children 
to  their  minister,  at  the  close  of  childhood,  or  the  commence- 
ment of  adolescence,  to  be  examined  according  to  the  cate- 
chism in  common  use,  and  then,  for  the  sake  of  greater  dig- 
nity and  reverence,  closing  the  ceremony  by  the  imposition 
of  hands.  "  Such  imposition  of  hands,  therefore,  says  he, 
as  is  simply  connected  with  benediction,  I  highly  approve, 
and  wish  it  were  now  restored  to  its  primitive  use,  uncor- 
rupted  by  superstition."  (Institutiones.  Lib.  iv.  cap.  xix.  §  4.) 
But  what  serves  to  throw  light  on  Calvin's  real  sentiments 
on  this  whole  subject  is  that,  in  commenting  on  Acts  viii. 
17,  he  reproaches  the  Papists  for  pressing  that  pasaage  into 
the  support  of  their  sacrament  of  confirmation ;  and  not 
only  asserts,  but  proves,  that  the  laying  on  of  hands  there 
spoken  of,  relates,  not  at  all  to  the  ordinary  and  sanctifying, 


ADDITIONAL    NOTES.  147 

but  to  ttie  miraculous  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  have 
long  since  ceased  in  the  church;  and,  of  course,  that  the 
passage  in  question  ought  never  to  be  quoted  in  favour  of 
confirmation,  or  of  any  other  permanent  rite  in  the  Chris- 
tian Church. 


(Note  E.) 
Vote  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  respecting  Baptism. 

It  has  been  sometimes  ignorantly,  and  most  erroneously 
asserted,  that  the  Westminster  Assembly  of  divines,  in  put- 
ting to  vote,  whether  baptism  should  be  performed  by 
sprinkling  or  immersion,  carried  it  in  favour  of  spi'inklijis^, 
by  a  majority  of  one  only.  This  is  wholly  incorrect.  The 
facts  were  these.  When  the  committee  who  had  been 
charged  with  preparing  a  "  Directory  for  the  worship  of 
God,"  brought  in  their  report,  they  had  spoken  of  the  mode 
of  baptism  thus:  "/^  is  lawful  and  siifficient  to  sprinkle 
the  chilciy  To  this  Dr.  Lightfoot,  among  others,  objected; 
not  because  he  doubted  of  the  entire  sufficiency  of  sprink- 
ling ;  for  he  decidedly  preferred  sprinkling  to  immersion  ; 
but  because  he  thought  there  was  an  impropriety  in  pro- 
nouncing that  mode  lawful  only,  when  no  one  present  had 
any  doubts  of  its  being  so,  and  when  almost  all  preferred 
it.  Others  seemed  to  think,  that  by  saying  nothing  about 
dipping,  that  mode  was  meant  to  be  excluded,  as  not  a  law- 
ful mode.  This  they  did  not  wish  to  pronounce.  When, 
therefore,  the  clause,  as  originally  reported,  was  put  to  vote, 
there  were  twenty-five  votes  in  favour  of  it,  and  twenty -four 
against  it.  After  this  vote,  a  motion  was  made  and  carried, 
that  it  be  recommitted.  The  next  day,  when  the  committee 
reported,  and  when  some  of  the  members  still  seemed  un- 
willing to  exclude  all  mention  of  dipping,  Dr.  Lightfoot 
remarked,  that  to  say  that  pouring  or  sprinkling  was  law- 
fid,  would  be  "  all  one  as  saying,  that  it  was  lawful  to  use 
bread  aiid  wine  in  the  Lord's  Supper."  He,  therefore, 
moved  that  the  clause  in  the  "Directory"  respecting  the 
mode  of  baptism,  be  expressed  thus  : 

"  Then  the  minister  is  to  demand  the  name  of  the  child, 


148  ADDITIONAL  NOTES. 

which  being  told  him,  he  is  to  say  (caUing  the  child  by  his 
name) — 

"  I  baptize  thee  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. '^ 

"  As  he  pronounceth  these  words,  he  is  to  baptize  the 
child  wath  water,  which,  for  the  manner  of  doing  it,  is  not 
only  laivful  but  sufficient,  and  most  expedient  to  be,  by 
pouring  or  sprinkling  of  the  water  on  the  face  of  the  child, 
without  adding  any  other  ceremony."  This  was  carried. 
See  LightfooVs  Life,  prefixed  to  the  first  volume  of  his 
Works,  (folio  edition,)  p.  4 ;  compared  with  NeaVs  History 
of  the  Puritans,  Vol.  11.  p.  106,  107,  compared  with  the 
Appendix,  No.  II.  (quarto  edition,)  where  the  "  Directory," 
as  finally  passed,  is  given  at  full  length. 

We  do  not  learn,  precisely,  either  from  Lightfoot's  bio- 
grapher, (who  was  no  other  than  the  indefatigable  Strype,) 
or  from  Neal,  by  what  vote  the  clause,  as  moved  by  Light- 
foot,  was  finally  adopted ;  but  Neal  expressly  tells  us,  that 
*'  the  Directory  passed  the  Assembly  with  great  unani- 
mity.''^ 

From  this  statement,  it  is  evident,  that  the  question 
which  was  carried  in  the  Assembly,  by  a  majority  of  one, 
was,  not  whether  affusion  or  sprinkling  was  a  lawful  mode 
of  baptism  ;  but  whether  all  mention  of  dipping,  as  one  of 
the  laivful  modes  should  be  ojnitted.  This,  in  an  early 
stage  of  the  discussion,  Avas  carried,  by  a  majority  of  one 
in  the  affirmative.  But  it  would  seem  that  the  clause,  as 
finally  adopted,  which  certainly  was  far  more  decisive  in 
favour  of  sprinkling  or  affusion,  was  passed  "  with  great 
unanimity.''^  At  any  rate,  nothing  can  be  more  evident, 
than  that  the  clause  as  it  originally  stood,  being  carried  by 
one  vote  only,  and  afterwards,  when  recommitted,  and  so 
altered  as  to  be  m,uch  stronger  in  favour  of  sprinkling,  and 
then  adopted  without  difficulty,  the  common  statement  of 
this  matter  by  our  Baptist  brethren  is  an  entire  misrepre- 
sentation. 


4 


DATE  DUE 

■mm- 

1**''*^^!^^^ 

y-.'- 

GAYLORD 

PRINTED  IN  U.S    A. 

*M 


